Conflict on Organizational Culture and Effectiveness

Question: Discuss about the Conflict on Organizational Culture and Effectiveness. Answer: Introduction According to Drew and Coulson?Thomas (2013) teams are considered as forms of work groups; however, not all work groups can be referred to as teams. It has been found that work groups are more in number than teams. Teams differ from groups in several aspects: task orientation, degree of interdependence, purpose, familiarity among members and degree of formal structure. Conflict is a significant aspect of culture in all organisations and best efforts are given to resolve the conflicts at the earliest, suitably through negotiation. Team conflicts may arise due to perceptions of individuals regarding actions and work of other individuals. Common causes of conflict may be competition over resources, incompatible work styles, conflicting interests, poor communication or deficiency in performance. Whether the concerned source of conflict is a work group or a working team makes a huge impact on the conflict resolution process. Effective negotiation strategies lead to a successful organisatio n with healthy cultural environment. Practical steps taken up in conflict management help in avioiding difficult situains effectively and overcome crisis. The conflict management process of Google Inc. is highy praised for its effectiveness and success in dealing with difficult situations. The performance of the organisation is enhanced through a suitable negotiation procedure considered for conflict management. The present paper analyses and critically discusses the impact of workgroups and teams and conflict and negotiation have on the culture of the organisation, Google. The paper aims to highlight how team and group concept in an organisation have an impact on the conflicts taking place within the organisation and how these conflicts are resolved through negotiation. Work group and teams Rosen (2014) outlines the definition of work group and team in context of organisational management. A group is formed with two or more individuals having a common set of characteristic or interest. Members of groups usually identify with each other with the help of similar triats. Teams are a group of people who try to achieve a common goal and work together in collaboration with each other. The terms team and group are interchangeable but there are distinct differences between the two. The primary point of dissimilarity is that the focus or strength of a team is dependent on the commonality of the purpose it has and how the connection between the individuals is established. On the contrary, a group is established with a by number of people who have cohesive willingness to carry out a certain action. In a team, individuals are more formal and with a similar goal they share, they have a tendency to work together by resolving the arising differences. In a tam, the members are found to be having an active participation in the discussions held and their eventual outcomes. Work group and team affect orgainazation effectivenesss and culture Organisational culture possess seven primary features; innovation and risk taking, attention to detail , outcome orientation, people orientation, team orientation, aggressiveness and stability. It has been found that teams have more tendency to include innovation in their work in comparison to work groups. They are also ready to take risks and face challenges in due course of fulfilling the set goals. On the contrary, work groups take up less challenges and do not consider bringing innovation in their work. Precise analysis of tasks is found more in team work. The underlying principle of working in teams is to focus on results and not on process. Work groups on the other hand do not emphasise on results to the extent desirable. Competitiveness and aggressivenss is much more profound in individuals working in teams. They are more encouraged and driven to perform as per the requirements of the tasks allocated. Teams are more stable in their functioning as compared to work groups (Alves son and Sveningsson 2015). In an orgainazatin like Google, the team work is one of the essential part of the working culture. The psychological safety is one of the essential part of the team work culture of Google, which ensures that the team members can work in the safe environment. The team members are also able to have high level of trust within the organization. The team members are able to depend upon each other, which will help them to deal with the challaegs they face with in the workplace. The team members of google also have a clear idea about the structure and working proticak of the comonay, which helps them to provide full support to the work they perform. The meaning of the work is an essstial part, which helps the team members to u understand the importance of the work they perform (Galegher, Kraut and Egido 2014). Organizational Conflict The following section tries to understand the meaning of conflict in the work group, its causes and its effect on the organization. Conflict begins when an individual or a group of individuals feel or are affected in a negative way by another individual or team (Odetunde 2013). Individuals and work groups who have interdependent relationships in an organization experience conflict which may be related to negative interdependence, differences in personal values, competition, authority and responsibilities differentials (Naima Mikkelsen 2013). In the context of an entity, conflict means a situation where two or more employees working in an organization have differences in their objectives and values. These differences impact their team spirit and capability to work as a group and hinder their performance (Seal and Mattimoe 2014). We can also divide theories of conflict on the basis of function, situation and interaction (Omisore and Abiodun 2014). The functional approach suggests that the conflict is a social function. Those who follow situational approach suggest that conflict is an expression under certain situations. The third theory sees conflict as an interactive process. Ultimately conflict is based on perceptions. Whenever a member of the organization believes that another member might create hurdles for his efforts, conflict is bound to happen. According to Google, work specialization, differences in goals, common resources, authority, job roles, expectations from the group are few of the causes of conflict in and among work groups and teams. One of the approaches which Google applies for resolving conflicts is through negotiations in which the two individuals or groups discuss various solutions that is acceptable to both the parties in order to resolve the conflict (Shargh, Fatehma, Soufi, Mansour and Dadashi, Mohammad Ali 2013). Negotiation is a mutual concessional process of decision making which involves two or more parties with differences in their preferences but are dependent upon each other in the organizational framework (Wallensteen 2015). In Google, when two or more team members have different desires and values, they get into the process of joint decision making. Managers at Google are trained to negotiate in these four types of situations (Boddy 2014): Bilateral negotiation there is a direct negotiation between the manager and the individual. Group negotiation - member of the work group including the manager negotiate within the group to arrive at a decision acceptable to the entire group in case of any conflict. Inter-group negotiation two or more conflicting work groups negotiate with each other to resolve the conflict. Here the manager could be a member of one or more work groups. Negotiation with the representatives of different departments: the manager negotiates with the representatives of other conflicting departments (Waddell et al. 2013). At Google, negotiators are trained to develop four important skills which have a significant role in resolving conflicts: Preparation and Setting Goals: Google has understood through extensive research that to have more favorable negotiation results it is important that people prepare for the negotiation and set goals. Managers at Google suggest that negotiators should carefully formulate their initial offer. Also, it is essential to decide about non-negotiable points in the conflict. If the negotiation fails, they should be able to consider alternative strategies. Their fundamental assumptions, goals and objectives are thoroughly checked by the negotiators. They also research what the other individual wants from the negotiation. Gathering Information: For an effective negotiation, Google tries to understand the conflict and its reasons in depth. Negotiators at Google listen to the other individuals arguments with great amount of attention and they try to collect as much details as possible. In order to enhance the process of collecting information, Google gets a group of negotiators participate in negotiations. In some cases, they have large negotiation teams for this purpose. In this way, negotiators at Google are able to discover economy concessions or proposals that satisfies both the conflicting parties. Communicating Effectively: At Google, the negotiators adopt a way of communication that maintains healthy relationships between themselves. In order to reduce the strength of conflict, they focus on the conflict issue than individuals. Managers at Google are great at persuasion. They structure their message in such a way that it is not just understood but well accepted by all the individuals or groups in conflict. Making Concessions: Google believes that concessions are very influential because they: drive the conflicting members toward the direction of probable agreement signify each members motivation to deal with trust, and aware the other member of the importance of the items of negotiations. However, it is only under certain conditions that concessions drive the conflicting members toward agreement. First, the other individual must be aware that negotiators action is a concession and is beneficial for him/her. Second, there should be an expectation attached with the concession that there must be reciprocation from the other individuals end. Finally, people have positive emotions from several smaller concessions than a single larger one. Thus, concessions should not be given all at once but in installments. In addition to the above-mentioned skills, negotiators at Google strictly avoid negative communications and attitudes while resolving conflicts in its work groups. They never avoid any conflicts in their work groups. Avoiding conflicts causes more stress and increase in the degree of the conflict. People at Google never become defensive whenever a conflict situation arises. Each individual tries to understand the complaints and point of view of the other member. This eases the process of conflict resolution maintaining and even strengthening the inter personal relationships of the individuals of the group. Often in conflict situation, there are few people who always criticize the other but not in Google. In Google work group members analyze the conflict situation objectively to come up with a solution which is beneficial to both the individuals or the groups. Organizational Culture and Effectiveness at Google The culture wihin an organization consist of the shared thoughts related to the belief and behvours of the people within the organization. The culure within the orgaimzation has a strong influence upon the working environement. Accordong to Hogan and Coote (2014), organizational culture within an organization is made of all the expectation of the and shared value of the orgamization. The working philosophy and experience within the orgamization is also included in the work culture. The culture within the organization is also based on the shared beliefs of the people within the organization. With the help of the culture it is also possible to define the formal and informal rules within the organization. On the other hand, Bschgens, Bausch and Balkin (2013) have defined organizational culture is the medium, which the employees of the orgamization to relate its thought and also communicate among themselves. This thus help them to deal with the issues realted to the strategy of the organ ization. Googles effective organizational structure and organizational culture which encourages and supports superiority in innovation is the key to its success. The companys organizational culture is unconventional. Google places great importance in change as well as direct social connections among the members of the organization. As theories suggests, well aligned organizational structure and organizational culture leads to higher possibilities of prosperity. This gain has been clearly reflected in Googles prosperity (Harper 2015). Organizational structure at Google is cross functional. Individuals are grouped on the basis of functions like Sales Management Team, Finance Team, Product Design Team etc. It also groups its employees on product basis who work together to develop a particular product. It is a direct result of team based organizational structure that organizational culture at Google is open, innovative, and smart with prominence on excellence. Every individual of the work group i s encouraged to come up with and contribute valuable and innovative ideas. Each work group is like a small family wherein individuals can share and express their thoughts and feeling with each other. Google has successfully created an ambience where risk taking ability of employees is strengthened. Also, they feel that they can have clearer goals, can rely on each other, and believe that their effort is directing a change. The social aspect of team is highly emphasized as not everyone is motivated with money. All of Googles employees are part of at least one work group and are usually project oriented (Cummings and Worley 2014). A casual and democratic atmosphere is the key element of Googles workplace culture. Work teams at Google are comprised of equal authorities and a certain degree of autonomy is always provided to them. Organizational culture at Google is one of the most inspiring, motivational, influencing, productivity oriented, and innovation-inducing environment in the world. Google has adopted a very informal organizational culture. Employees at Google work in groups of three to four in a very dense manner. It has adopted People culture as its corporate culture. From the global market strategies, Google understand that there should be necessary modifications in the organizational culture according to the national culture. Which is why it has successfully created one of the finest culture in the industry. Google focuses on keeping the performance and morals of its employees well aligned with its strategy to prosper with rising globalization and it tailors its workplace culture to realize the organi zational objective. Googles organizational culture is usually noticeably unique and difficult to compare with other organizations. It is significantly rich in terms of quality (Steiber and Alnge 2013). At Google, organizational effectiveness is a direct result of team effectiveness. The way of interaction among team members, their work structure, and how they view their contributions is far more important than who are the team members. With two years of extensive research, Google learnt that there are five essential factors that distinguishes successful teams from others (Google Rework 2015): Psychological safety: The psychology of the team members need to be boosted, which will help to deal with the environment in the wotkplace. Team members feel safe to take risks and get countered from each other. It si also esseantial to ensure all the members within the team can work in safe and healthy environment, which will help them provide full potentianl in the workplace. Dependability: Team members rely on each other and get things done on time and meet Googles tough criteria for excellence. It is crucial for the taem members to have good level of communication, which will help them to maintain good level of coordination within the workplace. Structure clarity: Team members have clearly defined responsibilities, plans, and goals. All the team members need to have high level of clarity within them selves,which will help them to understand the aim of the company and also ensure that they are able to contribute to meet the target of the company. Meaning of work: Work is of personal significance for team members. Eevery team members need to understand the meaning of the work, which will help them to under stand the polcies of the comonay. The meaning of the work will also help the workers to evaluate the importance of the work they are doing for the company. Impact of work: Team members think their work is worthwhile and drives transformation. Every team members should also realize the imopact of the work they are performing. This will also help them to understand their importance within the team. The importance within the team will help them to understand their individual value. Psychological safety was the most important dynamic according to Google. Googles Julia Rozovsky (Google Rework 2015)says, Were all reluctant to engage in behaviors that could negatively influence how others perceive our competence, awareness, and positivity. Although this kind of self-protection is a natural strategy in the workplace, it is detrimental to effective teamwork. Improvement of Conflicts and Negotiations In the businesss of Google, the comflicts and negotiation are an important part of the operational mannagment. According to Ziegler (2016), the negotiation amongst the employyes is the best ways to deal with the conflicts, which occurs within the workplace of a company. It helps to deal with the internal conflicts, which ocurrs within the organization. The process of negotiation involves discussions within the employees,which helps them to acess the importance of the situation. It is essential to idenfiy the cause of the conflict, before it is possible to implement the negotiation policy. With the help of the negotiation policy, it is possible to deal with the communication and other barriers faced by the employees. Conclusion From the above analysis it can be concluded that a team brings together people with same kind of interests and objectives. Teamwork originates with, and builds relationships among, a group of individual sharing a common interest. Work groups endeavours have also been found to result in improvement of company operations and work groups also bring benefits for the employees who participate in the groups. However, there are some distinct differences between teams and work groups. Teams are found to be more efficient in their working and have a more formal approach. The focus of teams is accomplishement of common goal of the team whereas for work groups the focus is on accomplishement of individual goals. Conflict management through negotiation is highly influenceed by working in teams or groups. Conflict management at Google has a direct impact on its organizational culture. Employees are regularly trained to deal with conflicts in a healthy way. Which is why at Google the understanding among work group members doesnt decrease in a conflict situation rather It builds trust and strengthens their interpersonal relationships. Google believes that the competence of resolving conflicts depends on the capability to manage stress by remaining sound. Verbal and non-verbal communications are properly read and interpreted this way. Work team members at Google pay attention to the emotions and efforts of other members and are conscious and appreciative of differences. Google has provided adequate room for decision making in the work group and teams. It constantly takes into consideration the wellbeing of staff for optimum performance of the company. It has a well-structured communication system throughout the organization to avoid rumor mongering. Managers at Google are excellent at delegating work and authority among the individuals of the work groups. The innovative style of management which Google has adopted ensures the participation of all of its employees rather than j ust directing them to get things done. Google provides support and necessary space for adequate interaction and dialoguing in conflict management process. Regular training workshops are organized for members of the organization on conflict management. Working together as a team, in peace and unity, to achieve a common goal and objectives of the organization for the good of all is the spirit of Google which makes it one of the best workplace culture. References Boddy, C.R., 2014. Corporate psychopaths, conflict, employee affective well-being and counterproductive work behaviour.Journal of Business Ethics,121(1), pp.107-121. Bschgens, T., Bausch, A. and Balkin, D.B., 2013. Organizational culture and innovation: A meta?analytic review.Journal of product innovation management,30(4), pp.763-781. Cadden, T., Marshall, D. and Cao, G., 2013. Opposites attract: organisational culture and supply chain performance.Supply Chain Management: an international journal,18(1), pp.86-103. Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G., 2014.Organization development and change. Cengage learning. Drew, S. and Coulson?Thomas, C., 2013. Transformation through teamwork: the path to the new organization?.Team Performance Management: An International Journal. Galegher, J., Kraut, R.E. and Egido, C., 2014.Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Psychology Press. Harper, C., 2015.Organizations: Structures, processes and outcomes. Routledge. Hogan, S.J. and Coote, L.V., 2014. Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A test of Schein's model.Journal of Business Research,67(8), pp.1609-1621. Naima Mikkelsen, E., 2013. A researcher's tale: how doing conflict research shapes research about conflict.Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal,8(1), pp.33-49. Odetunde, O.J., 2013. Influence of transformational and transactional leaderships, and leaders' sex on organisational conflict management behaviour.Gender Behaviour,11(1), p.5323. Omisore, B. and Abiodun, A. (2014). Organizational Conflicts: Causes, Effects and Remedies. International Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences, 3(6), pp. 120. Rework.withgoogle.com. (2015). re: Work - The five keys to a successful Google team. [online] Available at: https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/ [Accessed 2 Jan. 2017]. Rosen, N., 2014.Teamwork and the bottom line: groups make a difference. Psychology Press. Seal, W. and Mattimoe, R., 2014. Controlling strategy through dialectical management.Management Accounting Research,25(3), pp.230-243. Shargh, Fatehma, Soufi, Mansour and Dadashi, Mohammad Ali (2013). Conflict Management and Negotiation, International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 5 (5), pp. 538-543. Stensaker, B. and Vab, A., 2013. Re?inventing shared governance: Implications for organisational culture and institutional leadership.Higher Education Quarterly,67(3), pp.256-274. Steiber, A. and Alnge, S., 2013. A corporate system for continuous innovation: the case of Google Inc.European Journal of Innovation Management,16(2), pp.243-264. Van Dam, N. and Marcus, J., 2012.Organization and management: An international approach. Routledge. Waddell, D., Creed, A., Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C., 2013.Organisational change: development and transformation. Cengage Learning. Wallensteen, P., 2015.Understanding conflict resolution. Sage. Ziegler, J.N., 2016, June. The Dynamics of Multi-Level Regulatory Negotiation Across Policy Domains. In28th Annual Meeting. Sase.