Conflict Management

Emergent communication technologies along with globalization have led to a significant change in the way that team members interact, work, and communicate with each other. Companies welcomed virtual teams with open arms and according to Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2006), virtual teams refer to “geographically or organizationally dispersed people who work together using communication and information technologies to accomplish organizational tasks” (238). However, with globalization on the rise, companies have seen the need to expand their virtual teams even further, creating what today is known as Global Virtual Teams (GVT’s).  In that same article Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2006), explain that Global Virtual Teams (2006) are globally dispersed members working across cultural, geographical, and time boundaries in order to achieve a common goal. Given the mounting pressures faced by organizations today, this paper will analyze and focus on conflict management for Global Virtue Teams.

GTV’s provide organizations with numerous potential benefits and organizations must identify and learn how to deal with conflict. Conflict management refers to the management that is carried out to repair, alleviate and eradicate conflict within an organization. After understanding and effectively using conflict management, GVT’s can provide organizations with many benefits. First off, organizations can create GTV’s with employees that are experts in their respected area.  Ratcheva (2008) notes that virtual teams are formed from individual members with varying types of expert knowledge, which are then placed into a certain team role, and the team should tap into their specified expertise. This results in the formation of GVT’s with highly talented employees who are completely capable of meeting an organization’s goal with efficiency and quality. Yet, another reason why organizations form GTV’s is that through these virtual teams, organizations can provide around-the-clock service to customers. When the workday ends in California, it is just beginning in Europe. Being capable of providing this service can distinguish a company from others and in today’s fast changing market it is needed. Organizations also save costs in forming GVT’s; there is a reduce need in travel (e.g. hotel fees, flight tickets, meals, overtime) which result in savings.

Given the opportunities that GVT’s may provide, the question still at hand is: how can organizations create GVT’s that work effectively so that organizations can reap the benefits. According to previous research (Thomas and Kilmann 1974, Rahim 1983, 1992, Weiss, Massey & Song 2001) there are five modes that organizations can use when handling conflict in GVT’s. The first mode outlined is referred to as Avoidance Behavior, which is characterized when organizations fail to address the issue, refuse to confront parties involved and overall are unconcern with the issue. The second mode is Accommodation Behavior, is displayed when the organization attempts to accommodate all parties involved. Competition Behavior, the third mode, is characterized when each member of an organization has his or her own interest with disregard for the interest of others. This mode is dangerous for organizations because it involves members usually concealing information and negative attitude towards any other solution for the conflict at hand. Contrary to Competition Behavior the fourth mode is Collaboration Behavior, which is characterized by taking into account the interest of the parties involved, sharing of information and the efforts for a reachable solution are shared. In doing so an organization aims to discover the optimal solution for all involved. The last and final mode presented is referred to as Compromise Behavior, where organizations try to settle on middle ground by acknowledging differences. These modes have shown to have different affects in GVT’s, additionally to these modes of conflict handling there also exits several conventional conflict management practices and theories such as: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Holistic Approach (also known as third party) and Attribution Theory, just to name a few.

Conventional conflict management practices are when an organization has a set procedure established by which conflicts are dealt with. This might include a formal written dispute, which is sent to the higher levels of management and the issue is reviewed and action is taken. ADR practices include the use of a third party as an external arbitrator, formal interest based bargaining techniques, brainstorming, and intensive formal communication with employees (Roche and Teague, 2011). The Holistic Approach also known as the third-party approach is exactly what the second name suggests; when a third-party becomes involved in addressing the conflict within an organization. Lastly, Attribution Theory is similar to the five modes previously mentioned and Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2006) argue that “attribution can pave the way for conflict resolution” they also reiterate three of the five approaches as common conflict resolution approaches and these are: “integrative (solving the problem through collaboration), distributive (solving the problem through assertion), and avoidance (ignoring the problem)”(240). On the other hand, Roche and Teague (2011) suggest that conflict management should be less adversarial and more based on ADR’s principles of interest based bargaining, because this approach underlines the use of co-operative techniques and procedures that can lead to an agreement that incorporates the interests of all parties involved. The conflict management practices and approaches previously mentioned can be used by an organization to diffuse conflict within an organization if used effectively.

GTV’s are so dynamic, organizations need to consider several factors to avoid conflict. There are numerous factors that organizations should consider, however, due to a length constrain this paper we will focus only on two: communication and culture. What exactly do we mean by communication? Francesco (2005), defines communication as the process of transmitting ideas from one person to another. Francesco further defines cross-cultural communication as people from more than one culture communicating with each other. These two concepts seems simple enough, but in reality they are more complex than the definitions suggest and they can be affected by outside factors. For example, when GVT’s are formed, communication is carried out by technology and although technology has advanced in recent years, it is still not perfect. In fact, Kankahalli, Tan and Wei (2007) point out that GVT’s can face five kinds of communication problems that cause virtual teams conflict, and these are: “failure to communicate contextual information; failure to communicate information evenly; differences in salience of information to individuals; differences in speed of access to information, and interpretation of the meaning of silence” (242). This is then accelerated because team members around the globe have different access to communication and because team members work during different hours of the day and to top it off there are time zone differences. Communication conflicts alone are an issue, and then when you add cross-cultural communication and this becomes a complex you matrix almost impossible to deal with.

Note that we said almost impossible, because regardless of the difficulties and obstacles of cross communication, GVT’s indeed can be effective and reduce conflict and this is where conflict management comes into play. “Given that GVT members bring their disparate cultural values to the team, it is important to know how cultural dimensions may affect conflict and performance in GVT” (Melin, 2011, 241). These cultural values are identified by Hosftede as: “power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity, and long-term orientation” (Steers, Runde, & Nardon 2010). Therefore, cultural differences and expectations need to be clear, laid out and most of all accepted and in doing so conflict will be minimal. Also, if all team members understand and accept each other’s cultures, they will be more apathetic when dealing with conflict, but the manager needs to assure that this is happening.

In conclusion, I learned that organizations need to keep a close eye on the interactions of their GVT’s, in today changing economy an organization does not want to face dealing with an intractable conflict, which could last for years (Fiol, Pratt, & O’Connor, 2009). Organizations need to make sure that they have effective conflict management practices in place and that the process can be carried out at any point in time. Additionally I learned, that there are different ways to respond to a conflict and different conflicts may also have similar responses. It is also equally important to note that team diversity (including but limited to age, culture, experience, etc.,) and time dispersion in a GVT’s may be both opportunities as well as challenges for effective teamwork and organizations. Lastly, I learned that ignoring cultural differences can be a detriment to myself and to the organization I am a part of. Organizations need to be aware that conflict management is essential for Global Virtual Teams to function effectively.

Welcome to Blogs @ MIIS. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!