Styles of Managing Interpersonal Conflict: A Case Study On Student Affairs Department, Universiti Utara Malaysia

Transcription

1 Styles of Managing Interpersonal Conflict: A Case Study On Student Affairs Department, Universiti Utara Malaysia by Mohd Amy Azhar Mohd Harif Assoc. Prof., Ph.d, C.A.(M) (corresponding author) College of Business University Utara Malaysia Sintok Kedah Darul Aman Malaysia Fax : +(60) Tel : +(60) amyazhar@uum.edu.my Norsyema Hani Hj. Mahad Noor University Utara Malaysia 1

2 Abstract A case study on Student Affairs Department, University Utara Malaysia was conducted to identify the styles of managing interpersonal conflict practised among the employees. The department that consisted of several units was responsible in planning a conducive environment towards student s development in order to achieve the university s objective and goals. To be successful administrators, the employees in the Student Affairs Department must be able to manage conflict situations effectively as it represents the university image as a whole. For the purpose of this study, five styles of managing conflict developed by Thomas and Kilmann (1974) were referred. The five styles were competing, avoiding, accommodating, compromising, and collaborating. Interpersonal conflict could occur at all managerial levels and in the Student Affairs Department, conflict that arises between employees with colleagues in the same unit, conflict with colleagues in other unit, and conflict between employees and students were focused to determine the styles preferred. Apart of that, the study also tried to identify the employees perception pertaining conflict, and to look at the organizational communication. The contribution of this study was based on both primary and secondary data. A conflict management styles instruments developed by Rahim (1983) and Mastenbroek (1987) were used and modified in order to achieve the objectives of the study. The findings were then analysed and recommendations were made to improve the managing conflict styles in the department. The findings of this research indicated that the three objective of this research have been archived: conflict as perceived by the employees of the Student Affairs Department, Universiti Utara Malaysia was both valuable and destructive; compromising and collaborating styles are preferred and commonly practised by the employees of Student Affairs Department; and organizational communication showed that there is a high interdependency among employees that resembles their dedication and motivation to the department. To maintain and ensure the professionalism and quality of service provided by the employees, this research recommended that the employees interpersonal skill and knowledge must be continuously developed in managing conflict. The management is also recommended to identify the internal problems that might occur in the Student Affairs Department and improve effective communication to improve conflict management. 2

3 1.0 Introduction Conflict between employees in the workplace is a natural element of worthwhile communication. Conflict could occur at all managerial levels of interaction in the organization. It would likely to arise when there is a change in the organizations and individual strive to cope with their mutual interdependency in a changing organizational environment (Andrews & Herschel 1996). When conflict occurs, the relationship may be weakened and indirectly will affect productivity, working environment and organization s goal as a whole. However, conflict not always hinder progress towards desired goals, it also can serve as a red flag signalling for the need of change (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002) and contributes to positive impact for the organization. 1.1 Background of the study The source of conflict can be varies and several styles of managing conflict are being used to resolve the conflict. Even though there is no one best conflict style, each conflict situation must be conceptualise properly and react appropriately (Pierce & Gardner 2002). Based on Robbins (1996), one of the reasons for conflict is poor communication. Communication, which is every organization s lifeblood (Andrews & Herschel 1996) must be effective to ensure effective conflict management. For this term paper, Student Affairs Department of University Utara Malaysia is chosen as a case study because of our increased interest in looking at how conflict is managed by the department through all this while. 1.2 Objectives of the study This study tried to achieved the following objectives: 1. To determine styles of conflict management used by the Student Affairs Department s employees to resolve interpersonal conflict. 2. To identify Student Affairs Department s perception about conflict. 3. To identify the organizational communication in the Student Affairs Department. 3

4 2.0 Literature Review As a foundation to address how a conflict can be effectively managed by an organization through several styles of managing conflict, it is essential to consider the definition of conflict in an organization, the nature of conflict, and styles of managing conflict. 2.1 Definitions of conflict Conflict, generally is disagreements or an expressed struggle between and among individuals over incompatible goals, resources, or rewards (Borisoff 1989). According to Pierce & Gardner (2002), a conflict begins when one party perceives that another party has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, one or more of their concerns. In an organization, a conflict can be defined as a process of opposition and confrontation that can occur in organizations between either individuals or groups, when parties exercise power in the pursuit of valued goals or objectives and obstruct the progress of other parties (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002). 2.2 Nature of Conflict The nature of conflict is viewed from the perspective of classical organization theorists, human relation theorist, and modern theorists. In the classical organization conflict tend to be ignored and if occurs, managers will tried to control, eliminate, and redirect everyone s effort towards organization s goals (Andrews & Herschel 1996). From human relation theorists, conflict is normal and viewed as a threat where managers tried to discover ways to avoid conflict to maintain organizational system of harmony and social support (Andrews & Herschel 1996). Meanwhile, the modern theorist had suggested that conflict could either be dysfunctional or functional. Robbins (1996) has pointed out that conflict is destructive and bad for the organizations. Dysfunctional conflicts would results negative effects such as increased turnover, decreased employee satisfaction and morale, inefficiencies between work units, sabotage, labour grievances and strikes, and physical aggression. However, Andrews & Herschel, (1996) had noted that on an intellectual level, modern managers appreciate the value of conflict and it can be constructive that produces positive effects. Functional conflicts 4

5 from the literatures shown that it can lessen the social tension (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002, Andrews & Herschel 1996), foster creativity by challenging ideas and consumptions (Andrews & Herschel 1996), facilitate problem solving by motivate everyone involved to seek a better solutions and adaptive change (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002, Andrews & Herschel 1996), supplies feedback (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002) and help provide a sense of identity and purpose by clarifying differences and boundaries between individuals or groups (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002). In conclusion, the nature of conflicts discussed above would be used as a guideline to develop questionnaire that will be distributed for data collection to identify Student Affairs Department s perception about conflict. 2.3 Styles of Managing Conflict Next, the styles of managing conflict are considered. Styles can be viewed as strategies, tactics or orientation towards conflict (Andrews & Herschel 1996). Based on the literature, there are several styles that could be used to resolve or managing conflict. Avoiding, competing, accommodating, compromising, and collaborating are the most common styles used that were developed by Thomas & Kilmann (1974) described by Borisoff (1989). These styles are based on two basic dimensions of behaviour, which is assertiveness and cooperativeness. Assertiveness is referred to the extent when individuals attempt to satisfy his or her concerns while cooperativeness is referred when the individual attempts to satisfy another party concerns. The styles will be briefly discussed below. Avoiding referred to Wagner III & Hollenbeck (2002) is the most unassertive and uncooperative style, requires staying neutral at all costs and refrain from arguing. The goal is to delay. Andrews & Herschel (1996) supported the statement and noted that this style has the strongest negative relationship with employee s satisfaction. It was normally applied when the conflict is trivial or more important conflict is pressing. 5

6 Competing is assertive and uncooperative style, identified with win-lose behaviour which one party tries to overpower the other with aim to satisfy one s own interest (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002). Based on Andrews & Herschel (1996), this style is said to be effective when quick, decisive action is required especially to cope with crisis and when the goal is to win at all cost. Accommodating is unassertive and cooperative style that referred to those who willing to set aside their own concerns and surrendering to those of others with aim to maintain pleasant interpersonal relationship (Andrews & Herschel 1996). The style is said to be useful for showing reasonableness, developing performance, creating goodwill, and dealing with issues of low importance. Compromising is a mid-range assertive and cooperative style that seeks partial satisfaction of everyone through exchange and sacrifice, settling for acceptable rather than optimal solution (Wagner III & Hollenbeck 2002). According to Andrews & Herschel (1996), this style is considered fair with both parties agreed to interact and put effort to solve the problem. Collaborating is highly cooperative and assertive style, which recognized as win-win is the most integrated and productive conflict handling behaviour. Wagner III & Hollenbeck (2002) also supported the statement and added that collaborating attempt to satisfy everybody by working in difference. Based to Andrews & Herschel (1996), this style is build upon trust building process which, conflict is faced openly and directly, and evoke intellectual rather than emotionally. 3.0 Background of Student Affairs Department, UUM Student Affairs Department of Universiti Utara Malaysia is overall responsible in planning a conducive environment towards student s development to achieve the university s objective to produce professional, educated, and trained human resources. In order to identify the styles of managing interpersonal conflict practised by the employees 6

7 of Student Affairs Department, it is appropriate to view the background of the department in terms of vision, mission, general objective, and also the customer charter. 3.1 Vision To be an excellent centre in students development and to be an important component to Universiti Utara Malaysia in achieving its aspiration as university of management in producing intelligent, knowledgeable, and decent students. 3.2 Mission To develop and expand its effective and efficient service and development of students through a quality and professional structure, process, system, and mechanism. 3.3 General Objective To develop student s potential in physical, mental, and spiritual aspects through curriculum and non-curriculum programmes and student activities. 3.4 Customer Charter of Student Affairs Department From the customer charter, we identified that Students Affairs Department is striving towards: Developing knowledgeable and respectable students. To initiate organizational and volunteerism spirit. To manage and accommodate adequate and comfortable facilities and services. To take care student s harmony and welfare. To develop student s well being. To perform duty fast, wise, and competently. To provide adequate dedicated, committed, trained, discipline, responsible, and productive staff. To ensure Student Affairs Department is always aware and responsive to the needs and wants of its customers, students, university, community, and nation. To increase the prestige and quality of administration profession in Student Affairs Department. 7

8 3.5 Organization Charts of Student Affairs Department Deputy Vice Chancellor Director Dean of Student Development Admin. & Finance Unit Finance & Student Welfare Unit Strategic Business Unit (SBU) Student Relation Unit Entrepreneur Unit College Ko-K Centre Art & Culture Unit Sports Centre Student Services & Housing Unit College Shop Student s Medical Centre Rakan Muda Secretariat Career & Counselling Centre Islamic Centre 4.0 Managing conflicts in Student Affairs Departments For the purpose of this study, styles of managing conflict will be focused on interpersonal conflict. Interpersonal conflict in Student Affairs Department can be defined as a conflict that might occurs between individuals or between an individual and a unit (Andrews & Herschel 1996). Individual will be referred to colleagues or employees in the units of Student Affairs Department, employees in other units, and also between employees and students. To be successful administrators, conflict situations must be manage effectively. This requires practising different conflict management styles, depending upon the conflict situation faced. 8

9 5.0 Methodology This research methodology will be using both primary and secondary data. The primary data is based on results from questionnaires adjusted from instruments developed by M. A. Rahim (1983) and Mastenbroek (1987). The questionnaires are distributed to several Student Affairs Department units at UUM that have been randomly selected as a sample. From 60 questionnaires distributed, 32 questionnaires (53%) returned and only 31 (52%) applicable for data findings. The questionnaire consisted of two parts where Part 1 needs the respondents to fill information regarding their demographic factors (job category, age, gender, length of years in service, and education level). Meanwhile Part 2 will be looking at how the employees perceived conflict, the styles used in managing conflict, and the organizational communication that occurs in the department. The questionnaire can be referred at Appendix 1. For data analysis, all data were computed using Excel for Windows software. The secondary data consisted of readings from books, and articles about conflict from the Internet. Findings from the questionnaires and secondary data were then be analysed and used to clarify all the objectives of the study. 6.0 Findings Below are the findings resulted from the data analysis. From the demographic factors in Part 1, the support staff is outnumbered the other job category with percent compared to middle management with percent and top management with just 3.22 percent. In terms of age, respondents in the range of age 25 to 35 represented the higher percentage with percent compared age below 25 with percent and age 36 to 45 with 9.68 percent. Most of the respondents were female with percent compared to men with percent. Those who already in service between 1 to 5 years contributed the highest percentage with percent compared to 6 to 10 years with percent, 10 to 15 years with 6.45 percent and below 1 year with 3.23 percent. Meanwhile for the educational level, respondents with SPM and STPM that been described in the questionnaire as Others were the highest with percent 9

10 compared to Diploma and Bachelor Degree with percent, Master with 6.45 percent and PhD with only 3.22 percent. Refer Appendix 2. In Part 2, the employees perception about conflict have been summarized in the Table 1 below. Perceptions about conflict Agree (%) Disagree (%) Conflict is bad and should be ignored Conflict is normal and should be avoided Conflict is good to determine the need of change Conflict should be valued as it can gives positive effects. Conflict is destructive and produces negative effects Conflict is when individual try to cope with their mutual interdependency in a changing environment Table 1: Perception about conflict Next, the findings for the styles of managing interpersonal conflicts are considered. For managing conflict with colleagues in the same unit, competing, and compromising styles were identified to be most preferred with percent and percent. Meanwhile collaborating styles contributed percent followed by accommodating with percent and lastly avoiding percent as shown in Table 2. 10

11 Competing Collaborating Avoiding Accomodating Compromising Percentage Competing Collaborating Avoiding Accomodating Compromising Percentage Managing conflict with colleaques in the same unit Table 2:Managing conflict with colleagues in the same unit For managing conflict with colleagues in other unit, compromising was the most preferred styles with percent followed by collaborating and accommodating with both contributed to percent. Avoiding scored 20 percent and finally the least preferred style was competing with percent. Refer Table 3. Managing conflict with students Table 3: Managing conflict with colleagues in other unit 11

12 Competing Collaborating Avoiding Accomodating Compromising Percentage For managing conflict with students, collaborating was the most preferred style with percent followed by competing with percent. Compromising, accommodating, and avoiding each contributed to percent, percent, and percent. Refer Table 4. Managing conflict with students Table 4: Managing conflict with students In terms of communication, the results were summarized in Table 5. Issues Agree (%) Disagree (%) We learn from each other experience Communication from all levels especially with higher levels is all right. Ideas and initiatives from employees are taken seriously in this unit or department. Everybody who works here knows what the unit/department stands for We have clearly been defined in areas of responsibility in our unit/department This unit does a great deal and take good care of its members Table 5: Communication 12

13 7.0 Conclusion Overall, it could be concluded that the findings had achieved the objectives of this study. For the first objective, conflict as perceived by the employees of the Student Affairs Department, Universiti Utara Malaysia was both valuable and destructive. They agreed that conflict could contribute to positive effect and could determine the need of change. Even though, it represented only 60 to 67 percent, it showed that the employees had appreciated the occurrence of conflict rather than avoiding it. However, nearly 90 percent respondents agreed that conflict is when individual try to cope with their mutual interdependency in a changing environment. For the second objectives of the study, it could be summarized that compromising and collaborating styles are preferred and commonly practised by the employees of Student Affairs Department with percent and percent. It showed that the employees had reflected their effort in providing a quality and professional service parallel to the department s customer charter. However, other styles did not varied much with competing contributed percent followed by accommodating style with19.42%, and avoidance with the least of percent. Refer Table 6 below. In managing conflict with colleagues in the same unit, the rational competing style was high might due to competition among employees in the unit to strive for rewards such as raises, promotion or recognition. Thus, they tried to overpower the other to satisfy their self- interest. This condition applied to definition of conflict by Borisoff (1989) mentioned in the literature review. Meanwhile, employees could be said tried to be fair and willing to set aside their own concern to maintain pleasant relationship in solving conflict with colleagues in other department by compromising and accommodating. As well as managing conflict with students, compromising and collaborating styles showed that the employees were promoting win-win situation that tried to satisfy everybody by working in difference. 13

14 Competing Collaborating Avoiding Accomodating Compromising Percentage Summary of styles in managing conflict Table 6: Styles of Managing Conflict in Student Affairs Department For the third objectives, the organizational communication showed that there is a high interdependency among employees that resembles their dedication and motivation to the department. Communication was both upward and downward where participation was encouraged and the employees were highly inspired to achieve the department s goals. 8.0 Recommendation To maintain and ensure the professionalism and quality of service provided by the employees, it is recommended that the employees interpersonal skill and knowledge must be continuously developed in managing conflict. More attention must be emphasized to the support staffs that represent 74 percent of the respondents as they had lower educational level compared to the other respondents. It can be implemented by improving their understanding on the strength and weaknesses of those five styles of managing conflict and work towards the appropriate use depending on situation. Apart of that, employee s perception on conflict should also be improved as the findings showed that still 45 percent respondents agreed that conflict is bad and should be ignored. Conflict also could be better managed by improving employee awareness in accepting 14

15 and appreciating the diversity of individuals within their department. As competing style was high while managing conflict within the same unit, the management also is recommended to identify ways to encourage more collaborative styles to promote healthy and harmonious environment. From the findings, it showed that about 35 percent expressed their dissatisfaction with the management and the responsibilities assigned to them. Thus, the management is recommended to identify the internal problems that might occur in the Student Affairs Department and improve effective communication to improve conflict management. This is important not only to enhance the unit s interdependency and cohesiveness for building a better relationship but also to ensure the mission and vision can be achieved. 15

16 References Andrews, P.H. and Herschel, R.T. (1996). Organizational communication: empowerment in a technological society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. Borisoff, D. and Victor, D.A. (1989). A communication skills approach. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Mastenbroeck, W.F.G. (1993). Conflict management and organization development. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Pierce, L.P. & Gardner, D. G. (2002). Management organizational behavior: an integrated perspective. Ohio: South Western. Robbins, S.P. (1996).Organizational behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Wagner III, J.A. & Hollenbeck, J.R (2002). Organizational behavior: securing competitive advantage. 4 th Edition. Orlando: Harcourt, Inc. Walters, J. (1993). Conflict resolution and communication. 16