This article talks about the most common types of conflicts that arise at work, and provides researched evidence on how people tend to deal with the conflict. This is highly reflective of chapter 10 in our textbook, titled "Conflict and Negotiations."
Interpersonal conflict is mostly referred to throughout this article. Interpersonal conflict is simply conflict that arises between two people. This can be due to to personality differences, power struggles, and authority struggles. I thought that the statistics provided were really shocking when looking at how many people say they have lost productive time at work worrying about conflict with another person. Over 50% of workers say they have lost time due to, and only due to, workplace conflict.
According to the article, 28% of people say they have avoided confrontation. This can be related to the conflict handling style called avoidance that we learned about in class. Handling conflict in this manner is highly unproductive because you are being both uncooperative as well as unassertive. 37% of people say that they have lost their commitment to the company due to hostile confrontation. I believe this is most relatable to handling conflict based on competition. You want it your way, and you are not willing to cooperate with your coworkers, resulting in altercations.
But, work conflict doesn't always have to be negative. In order to get the most out of work, and resolve conflicts both effectively and efficiently, workers should pick their battles. There is no need to constantly fight about everything. Each person should try to negotiate with the other to come to a mutual agreement. You may need to distribute or compromise some of your wants with the other's wants. Most importantly, there needs to be some form of leadership in the organization. Whether it is authority or emergent leadership, there needs to be a person in the workplace to help resolve conflict that arises between two or more coworkers.
How do you think conflicts should be treated at work? Do you think a boss should get to resolve all conflicts that arise, or do you think leaders emerge during times of need to help others out?
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-01-02/living/cb.work.conflict_1_conflict-resolution-workplace-stress-worker?_s=PM:LIVING
- Kelly Moran
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Workplace Anxiety
The following article that I found discusses stress and anxiety caused by mostly work related issues. This article is highly reflective of chapter 7 in our textbook, titled "Managing Stress and Emotions."
There are constant changes in a work environment. Some of these changes could include demands, deadlines, and both interpersonal and intrapersonal conflict. Each one of these changes causes stress, and it is up to our bodies to mentally, physically, or emotionally react to these changes. As the article points out, working long hours, dealing with role and information overload, and worrying about job security can all be stressors in the workplace.
Relating the topic of stress to Selye's GAS model, the initial stage, called the alarm phase, has the highest tolerance for stress. An example of something that may take place in this type of situation would be completing a task that has just arose at work. You may initially be stressed when that task is brought to you, but once it is completed you are able to return back to your resting state. The resistance phase could be related to an extremely busy week or two at work. Your body is drawing from the fats and sugars it has stored, but this is only a temporary fix. The resistance phase leads into the exhaustion phase of Selye's GAS model. Let's say that the stressful situation at work continues for a prolonged period of time at work, resulting in your body going to the exhaustion phase. Everyone at some time or another has been completely depleted off all energy due to the stress that is put upon us.
On top of getting both professional mental and physical help, the article points out to be almost Zen-like when dealing with a chaotic work environment. Many of the stressors that arise everyday at work are not going to go away, but the way that an individual deals with them is what really needs to change. I know one thing that works very well for me is time management. I prioritize my work and keep a schedule in order to stay organized. Organizations should also make the expectations clear to their employees in oder to decrease a loss of productive work hours due to ambiguity.
Most importantly, workers need to stay positive through all of the negative emotions that come along with being stressed out. This will drastically help decrease the burnout that comes along with being stressed out at work.
What other ways do you think individuals can deal with the stress at work? Do you believe there are right and wrong ways to deal with the stress you encounter? How about any of your personal experiences?
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/work-overload-brings-panic-anxiety-stress/story?id=9868689&page=4
- Kelly Moran
There are constant changes in a work environment. Some of these changes could include demands, deadlines, and both interpersonal and intrapersonal conflict. Each one of these changes causes stress, and it is up to our bodies to mentally, physically, or emotionally react to these changes. As the article points out, working long hours, dealing with role and information overload, and worrying about job security can all be stressors in the workplace.
Relating the topic of stress to Selye's GAS model, the initial stage, called the alarm phase, has the highest tolerance for stress. An example of something that may take place in this type of situation would be completing a task that has just arose at work. You may initially be stressed when that task is brought to you, but once it is completed you are able to return back to your resting state. The resistance phase could be related to an extremely busy week or two at work. Your body is drawing from the fats and sugars it has stored, but this is only a temporary fix. The resistance phase leads into the exhaustion phase of Selye's GAS model. Let's say that the stressful situation at work continues for a prolonged period of time at work, resulting in your body going to the exhaustion phase. Everyone at some time or another has been completely depleted off all energy due to the stress that is put upon us.
On top of getting both professional mental and physical help, the article points out to be almost Zen-like when dealing with a chaotic work environment. Many of the stressors that arise everyday at work are not going to go away, but the way that an individual deals with them is what really needs to change. I know one thing that works very well for me is time management. I prioritize my work and keep a schedule in order to stay organized. Organizations should also make the expectations clear to their employees in oder to decrease a loss of productive work hours due to ambiguity.
Most importantly, workers need to stay positive through all of the negative emotions that come along with being stressed out. This will drastically help decrease the burnout that comes along with being stressed out at work.
What other ways do you think individuals can deal with the stress at work? Do you believe there are right and wrong ways to deal with the stress you encounter? How about any of your personal experiences?
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/work-overload-brings-panic-anxiety-stress/story?id=9868689&page=4
- Kelly Moran
Gulf Oil Spill
Hindsight is always 20/20, especially for the companies involved in the Gulf Oil Spill. You can read a list of the bad decisions they made through this link:
http://www.aolnews.com/2010/11/09/disaster-in-the-gulf-one-bad-call-after-another/
In the article, a situation is described where the company was worried about just getting the job done, not worried about the quality of the work. Basically, all of the mistakes were just a case of not double-checking the work that was done and materials were used that had not been tested properly.
I believe this relates back to an overconfidence bias from the company. They were confident to do this type of drilling in the past and just assumed they would do it correctly again. The problem is they also did not feel the need to put in the checkpoints I'm assuming were previously used. The company used their experience to justify not following all of the guidelines and it cost them and thousands of others dearly.
Should there be guidelines placed on companies that do drilling? Is there any way to hold companies like this accountable for their decision-making before disaster strikes again?
Casey Zimmerman
http://www.aolnews.com/2010/11/09/disaster-in-the-gulf-one-bad-call-after-another/
In the article, a situation is described where the company was worried about just getting the job done, not worried about the quality of the work. Basically, all of the mistakes were just a case of not double-checking the work that was done and materials were used that had not been tested properly.
I believe this relates back to an overconfidence bias from the company. They were confident to do this type of drilling in the past and just assumed they would do it correctly again. The problem is they also did not feel the need to put in the checkpoints I'm assuming were previously used. The company used their experience to justify not following all of the guidelines and it cost them and thousands of others dearly.
Should there be guidelines placed on companies that do drilling? Is there any way to hold companies like this accountable for their decision-making before disaster strikes again?
Casey Zimmerman
NASA and its Issues
It is often said that the Columbia disaster was caused by groupthink from those that were in charge of inspecting the craft before takeoff. In this article, "The Nation: NASA's Curse?" is about how even though NASA has some of the world's most brilliant people working for them does not mean that they are always making the best decisions because the data needed is not always available. Here's a link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/09/weekinreview/the-nation-nasa-s-curse-groupthink-is-30-years-old-and-still-going-strong.html
This report says that because information was not passed up the proper chain of command, the people at the top were making decisions without all of the facts, which could lead to deadly consequences.
In Chapter 11, there is a section about faulty decision-making. First, I believe this relates to the overconfidence bias. The people at NASA know that they have the brains to do this job, but are they relying too much on their knowledge and not all of the facts that they need to make a well-rounded decision?
The article also points out how this situation could have been framing bias, the decision being influenced by the way it was presented. The engineers in charge did not believe that it the falling foam was a problem, so they did not report all of the possible risks, just took the best case scenario.
How should NASA reframe their decision-making process to make sure that there are checkpoints to prevent this kind of thinking? Should there be other people outside of NASA that will hold the rocket scientists accountable for their decision-making before a problem happens again?
Casey Zimmerman
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/09/weekinreview/the-nation-nasa-s-curse-groupthink-is-30-years-old-and-still-going-strong.html
This report says that because information was not passed up the proper chain of command, the people at the top were making decisions without all of the facts, which could lead to deadly consequences.
In Chapter 11, there is a section about faulty decision-making. First, I believe this relates to the overconfidence bias. The people at NASA know that they have the brains to do this job, but are they relying too much on their knowledge and not all of the facts that they need to make a well-rounded decision?
The article also points out how this situation could have been framing bias, the decision being influenced by the way it was presented. The engineers in charge did not believe that it the falling foam was a problem, so they did not report all of the possible risks, just took the best case scenario.
How should NASA reframe their decision-making process to make sure that there are checkpoints to prevent this kind of thinking? Should there be other people outside of NASA that will hold the rocket scientists accountable for their decision-making before a problem happens again?
Casey Zimmerman
Monday, March 21, 2011
Conflict and Negotiations
Although we have talked about Michael Scott's poor leadership skills already, while I was reading Chapter 10, Conflict and Negotiations, one episode of the Office instantly came to me. In season 2, there is an episode called Conflict Resolution. Even though the entire episode is Michael "helping" his employees work out their conflicts, the conflict with Angela and Oscar is a great example of the different types of negotiations. Watch this video clip from 2:08 through 7:18.
http://www.tbs.com/video/index.jsp?eref=google&oid=185909
Toby is letting Oscar vent his issues with Angela. This is similar to an avoidance technique--after he is done, the problem won't be brought up again.
Michael decides to step in and take over. While he has Angela and Oscar in the conference room, he goes through the different ways to negotiate. He talks about lose-lose, or in our textbook it would be avoidance, win-lose (accommodating), win-win (compromising), and win-win-win (collaborating). Making the baby poster into a t-shirt is Michael's way of having a win-win-win situation, although this does not make either party happy. What could be a better way to solve their dispute?
If you go on and watch the rest of the episode, Michael takes it upon himself to help settle all the disagreements in the office. It eventually just upsets everybody, causing more animosity towards one another. Instead of having the employees vent to the human resource manager and then read aloud to the entire office, how could Dunder Mifflin better deal with conflicts?
Have you ever had a conflict with someone in the workplace? How did you come to a solution?
Written by: Jenny Liechti
http://www.tbs.com/video/index.jsp?eref=google&oid=185909
Toby is letting Oscar vent his issues with Angela. This is similar to an avoidance technique--after he is done, the problem won't be brought up again.
Michael decides to step in and take over. While he has Angela and Oscar in the conference room, he goes through the different ways to negotiate. He talks about lose-lose, or in our textbook it would be avoidance, win-lose (accommodating), win-win (compromising), and win-win-win (collaborating). Making the baby poster into a t-shirt is Michael's way of having a win-win-win situation, although this does not make either party happy. What could be a better way to solve their dispute?
If you go on and watch the rest of the episode, Michael takes it upon himself to help settle all the disagreements in the office. It eventually just upsets everybody, causing more animosity towards one another. Instead of having the employees vent to the human resource manager and then read aloud to the entire office, how could Dunder Mifflin better deal with conflicts?
Have you ever had a conflict with someone in the workplace? How did you come to a solution?
Written by: Jenny Liechti
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
What Would You Do?
Many people are put into uncomfortable situations where you find yourself asking what you should do. A new television show on ABC has found a way for people to be asked the question "What Would You Do?" more often then they thought. The show presents ethical and moral dilemmas in a public place that has on lookers, as the shows tag line asks, either "Stepping In, Stepping Up, or Stepping Away - What Would You Do?" This particular show fits right into to a chapter out of our Organizational Behavior textbook on making decisions. Decision making is defined as making choices among alternative courses of action, including inaction. That is exactly what this show is to the on lookers of these situations that the show sets up. The on lookers are choosing a course of either inaction to ignore the situation that they are witnessing or are going to choose a course of action and to step into the situation to either voice their opinion or try to help calm and fix the situation or dilemma they are witnessing. When put into these situations whether on a television show or not we are experiencing nonprogrammed decisions. On one episode of the show the host takes the show to Arizona to see if people will step in when a security guard approaches a hispanic man on the basis of the FB 1070 law that was passed in Arizona in April 2010 and asks him and his family for ID and proof that they belong here in this country.
What kind of decision making approach would you take to this situation. I hope that I am right when I say that your decision would be a nonprogrammed decision because this is a situation that we don't see very often in our country which we are all thankful for. But what would affect your decision to do something, would it be a framing bias or anchoring which would be relying to heavily on the fact that the patron looked Hispanic. Would groupthink take over. If one person presented one stance would everyone in the restaurant follow along or take their own stance?
What would you do?
Posted By: Amy Beagles
What kind of decision making approach would you take to this situation. I hope that I am right when I say that your decision would be a nonprogrammed decision because this is a situation that we don't see very often in our country which we are all thankful for. But what would affect your decision to do something, would it be a framing bias or anchoring which would be relying to heavily on the fact that the patron looked Hispanic. Would groupthink take over. If one person presented one stance would everyone in the restaurant follow along or take their own stance?
What would you do?
Posted By: Amy Beagles
Monday, March 14, 2011
Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom
Bernie Ebbers was the CEO of WorldCom up until he was convicted of fraud when it came to accounting on several different accounts. During trial he said he was not aware of this unethical behavior. In addition to his indictment, several other CEOs were also put on trial for similar behavior. To read more on the topic, here is the article:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/15/news/newsmakers/ebbers/
Although this article is on the older side, these events lead to the passing of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, discussed in Chapter one of the text book. Ebbers' defense was that he was not aware of the corrupt accounting practices that were going on in his organization. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act is a collection of eleven requirement that focused on taking much more responsibility as to what is going on in relations to the financial reporting. Organizations should always be conscious of ethical versus unethical behavior--it should not have to get to this level. According to the text, this act is supposed to help cut down on long-term unethical behavior. However, if organizations are continuously being ethical, they can end up saving money in the long run-they will avoid litigation costs.
Why do you think organizations continue to practice unethical bookkeeping/behavior overall? I feel as though, at least a large part of the time, they will eventually get caught, is it really worth it?
Posted by: Jenny Liechti
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/15/news/newsmakers/ebbers/
Although this article is on the older side, these events lead to the passing of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, discussed in Chapter one of the text book. Ebbers' defense was that he was not aware of the corrupt accounting practices that were going on in his organization. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act is a collection of eleven requirement that focused on taking much more responsibility as to what is going on in relations to the financial reporting. Organizations should always be conscious of ethical versus unethical behavior--it should not have to get to this level. According to the text, this act is supposed to help cut down on long-term unethical behavior. However, if organizations are continuously being ethical, they can end up saving money in the long run-they will avoid litigation costs.
Why do you think organizations continue to practice unethical bookkeeping/behavior overall? I feel as though, at least a large part of the time, they will eventually get caught, is it really worth it?
Posted by: Jenny Liechti
Thursday, March 3, 2011
King of Saudi Arabia King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud
Many people may not know much about this country. I am not going to pretend that I know everything about it or even a lot, but I do know a little bit and I know what I have read. Some of you may be asking how I can relate the actions of this King to anything in an Organizational Behavior class. Everything that you may read about this president sounds horrific. He has been the king since 1996, and officially since 2005 and has been known to be a peacemaker in the region. If you Googled his name you will find out that he has a great relationship with the United States, and with the Bush family. He has done things for his country such as establish libraries in different locations. Yes many of the things you would read about him are good. However he also has one of the most oppressive systems against women in the world. Women's rights in this country are so restricted. They much ask a male's permission to do almost anything such as work, marry, travel, and even to go outside. When they do go out of the house every part of their body must be covered except their hands and eyes and must have a male guardian accompany them.
You still may not understand what any of this has to do with Organizational Behavior, but it has a lot to do with it. When I first started learning about things in this class we studied a chapter about cultural diversity. Through Organizational Behavior I have learned that there is a great power distance in the Saudi Arabia culture. A great deal of women would like to lower the power distance but have a high uncertainty avoidance because of the repercussions they feel they would face. As Americans most of us have an ethnocentrism when it comes to other cultures and this is no different. When polled I bet most people would believe that our country does better and is better because of the injustice the Saudi women face. King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud in my opinion should be helping women become more independent and encouraging it. He looks like a poor leader because of this. However does this one injustice outweigh all of the good he has done as a leader as well.
What do you think?
Posted By: Amy Beagles
You still may not understand what any of this has to do with Organizational Behavior, but it has a lot to do with it. When I first started learning about things in this class we studied a chapter about cultural diversity. Through Organizational Behavior I have learned that there is a great power distance in the Saudi Arabia culture. A great deal of women would like to lower the power distance but have a high uncertainty avoidance because of the repercussions they feel they would face. As Americans most of us have an ethnocentrism when it comes to other cultures and this is no different. When polled I bet most people would believe that our country does better and is better because of the injustice the Saudi women face. King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud in my opinion should be helping women become more independent and encouraging it. He looks like a poor leader because of this. However does this one injustice outweigh all of the good he has done as a leader as well.
What do you think?
Posted By: Amy Beagles
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)