Types of Conflict
The literature of organizational behavior and management has highlighted different types of conflict. Conflict may be classified on the basis of its sources. The three types of conflict which may be present in an organization are Task conflict, Relationship conflict and Process conflict.
This occurs when two or more organizational members disagree on their task or content issues. This type of conflict is also sometimes called Substantive Conflict. Task conflict is defined as “disagreements among group member’s ideas and opinions about the task being performed, such as disagreement regarding an organization’s current strategic position or determining the correct data to include in a report” (Jehn, 1997b).
This occurs when two interacting social entities, while trying to solve a problem together, become aware that their feelings and emotions regarding some or all the issues are incompatible. This category of conflict has been labeled psychological conflict. This type of conflict is defined as “a condition in which group members have interpersonal clashes characterized by anger, frustration, and other negative feelings” (Pelled, Eisenhardt & Xin 1999).
Process conflict takes account of discrepancies concerning how the task should be done or how the delegation of resources should be made to different tasks. Process Conflict is an understanding of disagreements about features of how task completion will go on, particularly relating to matters of obligation, liability and answerability, and the allocation of resource.
Functions of Organizational Culture
Organizational culture is a set of beliefs, norms and deep set values which are central to the organization. It is the prescription for the ways in which work should be done in that particular organization. Organizational culture is a strong force which shapes the behavior of the people working in the organization. (Kotin & Sharaf 1976) It can be used to guide organizational processes without the need for tight control. Culture of an organization gives a sense of identity to the people working in that particular organization. Culture can also be used to motivate an employee by emphasizing the heroic dimension of the task. Culture can also be used to drive change.
360° performance evaluation
The 360-degree evaluation is a universally used method of evaluation in the management of human resource. In simple words, 360-degree evaluation is a system for assessing an employee’s performance derived from the feedback from other people with whom the individual deals for example the overseer, people who work with that individual, associates, and people working under that individual. It is a technique which accumulates input from many sources in an individual’s surroundings. (Bernardin & Beatty 1984)
360-degree evaluation can be an effective method of evaluation. Everyone wants to know how good they are with their work. The 360-degree evaluation can be a great motivational factor as it provides an individual a clear picture of what other people think about his/her works.
In other performance evaluation methods which are more conventional, superiors meet with their sub-ordinates personally to talk about their performance. (Wohlers & Manuel 1989) On the other hand, the 360-degree evaluation technique allows people to give confidential feedback about an employee’s performance at work. The manager and the sub-ordinate then talk about the comments received from other people.
This type of performance evaluation allows an individual to see how their performance is, as seen by other people, and gives them the chance to critically scrutinize their conduct. It helps the individual to get an idea about the areas in which his performance is at a satisfactory level and also the ones in which he needs to make an effort to improve.
An organizational environment can be defined as the forces which are external to the organization but effect the operations of the organization in one way or they other. (Blau & Schoenherr 1971) There are three key dimensions of organizational environment:
Capacity, in the context of organizational environment can be defined as the extent to which the environment can be helpful in the development of a business. In other words it is the degree to which the environment contributes prosperous or flourishing resources which are required by an organization in order to flourish. (Child 1982)
When discussing the organizational environment, Volatility is the extent to which the environment is instable. It is the extent and speediness of change in some of the significant works or progressions in the environment.
Complexity in organizational environment means the scale of heterogeneity and attentiveness between environmental components. In other words Complexity is the measure to which significant environmental constituents are related or unrelated to each other.
Jehn, K. A. (1997b). To agree or not to agree: The effects of value congruence, individual demographic dissimilarity, and conflict of workgroup outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, 287–305.
Jones, G. R., George, J. M., & Hill, C.W.L. (1998). Contemporary management. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly,44, 1–28.
Kotin J., & Sharaf M. ( 1976). Management succession and administrative style. Psychiatry, 30, 237-248.
Bernardin, H.J. & Beatty, R.W. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston: Kent.
Wohlers, A.J. & Manuel, L. (1989). Ratings of managerial characteristics: Evaluation difficulty, co-worker agreement, and self-awareness. Personnel Psychology, 42, 235-261.
Blau P. M., and Schoenherr R. A. ( 1971). The Structure of Organizations. New York: Basic.
Child J. ( 1982). Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice. Sociology, 6, 1-22.