A Situational Analysis of the Personal Investments Company - Case Study Example

Name Tutor Course Date Human Resource Management A Situational Analysis on the Personal Investments Company Introduction Personal Investments (PI) L.T.D is a company deemed with the task of investing funds for institutions. It is an entity for such massive financial processions worth billions of shillings. It is founded on the principles of loyalty to the company by all members, and by extension, an expectation of the same is considered for friends of the company; the stakeholders. For a long time the company has based its operations on this institutional philosophy, and this is witnessed by the ideals that each employee of the institution must hold. Unfortunately, the company has dwindled owing to failure to facilitate for capacity building, which faces an obvious opposition encrusted in the ideals of the institution. Sources of Conflicts within the company To report this case study on valid grounds, it keeps on emerging that the main grounds whereupon the conflicts emanate, revolve on the institutional founding principles and philosophies it was set upon. This further gets consideration on three perspectives, that is: management challenges of creating team players, internal conflicts, and conflicts of interests (Michael, Andrew, Tara, & Joakim, 2009). Management challenges of creating team players These conflicts arise when the institutional progression is not key to the overall management committee. In this case study, a small section of the management is either for, or against an institutional concern or development (Ya, Zhichang, & Catherine, 2012). The majority of the executives in quest against the arising issue act to imply an opposition. Because of the delegated role at top management level, part of the team have their hands tied and cannot execute a given duty on a monopolized decision (Emma, & Shaun, 2010). This is much worse a case when the principles governing the foundations of the management in compliance with the opposing ideas. These fundamentals being the points of reference, most often than not, have offered advantage to the opposing faction of the company against the single-handed employee. The result is a disregard to any well-intended effort or conceptions. The company thus ends up suffering from the management inadequacies In relation to the case study, the chief executive officer can at times be seen on the receiving end after an attempt to introduce a new concept to the company, which though comes in form of a long time friendship ties and associability to them. The management committee executive may present before the panel of his colleague executive committee members (Burgess & Burgess, 2006). This however is may not auger well basing on the institutional framework upon which the organization is set. It is a consequence that the managing directors face on day to day operations of their organizational premises. They find themselves on the receiving end and should work towards bringing a consolidating conflict management strategy at their disposal, if they must survive. Internal Conflicts This results when employees of an institution on contradicting terms as the ideals of the institution are concerned. For instance, one drives the corporation towards the set standards whereas the other acts in non-compliance to these concerns. This opposing execution of task can be due to overlap in departmental roles or by merely the incompetence among personnel. The overlapping roles is brought about by ambiguities existing in two different job description, but which share common grounds of execution; though they may not necessarily be in same departments (Fan, 2007). In this context for example, the C.E.O in question may lead a team of conservative executives, and with the knowledge that he himself is a fully-fledged official of the company. He however conforms to the inception of a refractory, well equipped and-almost at executive level- employee. For instance, an employee whose success has been based on a given tradition may be barricaded from their objectives. For instance, when an employee joins the company with a capitalist paradigm other than appearance advocacy, there will be a great confrontational basis of argument. This is exactly the underlying issue at hand that finally stirs up the entire institution. Moreover, the company will have very low standards of work ethics. This forms one of the main grounds that any institution can operate to avert probable conflicts of interests. The interest of an employee really counts in the overall success of the company (Barnes, 2007). Process Conflicts This category of disputing concerns stem from the internal conflicts perspective of institutional disputes. In the event that two or more departments of the organizational structure are running parallel then there is likelihood of ambiguity operations within bordering departments (George, 2009). This cannot be unraveled in the intermediate stages nor the time of inception of a program at a department. In most cases, this is always learnt of in the final procession stages. For instance, during quarterly, half yearly or yearly reporting stages. This makes the process conflicts to poses a critical significance and implication to the institution. It is such fundamental that it can be capable of liquidation of an institution at such an inopportune time. Worse of its compliments is that its mode of action appears at the reporting stage and cannot be averted because it has already pinched the organization (Barton, Stephens & Haslett 2009). In comparison to our case study, a given company will exhibit disputes within itself, for example, there will be an emergence of departmental conflicts if one member of the institution executes her strategies through paralysis of another department. This she can be really achieved so well in the event that the other departmental management does not conduct an in-depth scrutiny of the same. Therefore, this is used as a loophole against the departments in question (Leach, 2006). Types of Conflicts Task Conflicts These conflicts result from the duties and responsibilities as regards the description. The conflicts come about due to personal interests as well as from conflicting set Relationship Conflicts These conflicts come about because of individual relationships. This could be between the subordinate versus a subordinate, subordinate versus executive, or executive versus executive (Smith, 2007). Process Conflicts This type of conflict is amounted to by the protocols to be followed in executing duties. One party defines a given protocol contrary to another. It arises from defiance in most cases. When a subordinate officer insists to use methods contrary to the definition of their job description then this concept is clearly shown (Rosenhead, 2009). Approaches to Conflict Management used by the management, the C.E.O and Ms. Tabitha Conflict management strategies are aversive measures used within an institutional framework as a tool to curtail probable opposing concern that may arise between any two parties or groups. It acts as a mediation strategy for any warring factions or ideologies in an institutional set up. The best approaches to avert the heightening crises that were mounting in Personal Investments may have included both Avoidance style and dominating style. For the avoidance approach, the parties in question choose to abandon their conflicts of interests for the benefit of others. For example, when the new employee in an organization sees the fight in such extreme, and not being in the favor of her closest confidants, they should decide to quit trough a resignation. This does not much affect the institution so much as regards their ideal imaging, but in the ultimate span, it will (Parkin & Plan, 2008). The other approach is with dominance strategy. A strategy marvels self than the benefit of others. It is monopolistic in intention and cares less about the probable outcomes. This strategy is used by the executive management of by most institutional contexts to outdo non-complying employees. The employee can as well have the same strategy at their disposal should they be able to win the favors of a section of the management team; who may fortunately force the other office bearers to succumb to the organizational concerns rather than personal intentions (Emma & Shaun 2010). Justification to the strategies undertaken in the conflict management process The justification in this context is to validate the decision by both the management of PI and Ms. Tabitha to undertake the dominance and avoidance approaches respectively, to conflict management. For any management to undertake the dominance approach, it must form the main basis because both the management and the employees in question may be operating on two firm conflicting ideals. The employee may strongly be for flexibility. On the other hand, the institution’s executive may ply the Autonomy sea market. However, the monopoly by the executive committee as regards opinion as well as stake in the corporation may leave the employee defenseless; based on their belief in revolutionizing the methodology used by the company. Despite the fact that they may have a record of accomplishment, they end up being faced out; a justification of the domineering approach in resolving the conflict (Hill, 2005). To justify the notion that avoidance approach justified employee’s stance, it is quite critical to consider the defiance by the decision-making organ of the institution. Their failure to be at par with an employee’s new modules for incorporating better technological and social dimensions to a company may lead to so many issues. This denial is unjustified. The only approach the executives use to justify it is on mechanical and set rules, as the company’s philosophy of loyalty is set. This may be despite the full knowledge of the implication emanating from such a great opposition especially from leading organizational officials. They may be forced to comply (Leach, 2006). How the Conflict Management strategies can obtain implementation It is clear from the aforementioned that the various strategies undertaken by a given institution as regards their employee are not in their best modules when used in non compliance with various employees’ initiatives. For such a multi-billion company there may be a complete distortion of public image. This is because when a negotiation fails to get a consideration there can never be any grounds to approach it. If the foregoing can obtain a consideration then it can have yield the best forms of strategies for the mutual benefits of the warring factions. These strategies include compromising approach, integrative approach and attitudinal approach (Barnes, 2007). Attitudinal Approach This is a case involving the shift in ideological conception. The entire team constituting an institution and its executive committee need to heed to this type of approach. This makes it stand the best ground to facilitate the entrepreneurial paradigm shift in order to accommodate the growing popular concerns of one of their members. This approach will thereafter bear another handy approach; the compromising (George, 2009). Compromising approach In this case based on the emerging trends, a company needs to heed to a detailed capacity building process, especially by the management to be able to come out of the binding yet infamous institutional value of loyalty. This can be able to give it a firm basis upon which it would base a prediction-based approach against a performance-based approach. This approach will undoubtedly yield the next level, that is, integrative approach (George, 2009). Integrative Approach Here, there is a high sense of respect for both self and others. It brings about collaboration that finally yields consolidation and a harmonious ground whereupon the institution operates uniformly (George, 2009). Conclusion Concisely, basing our argument on the excerpt to resound the structural and functional organization of Personal Insurance (PI), I would strongly advice the C.E.O Mr. Richardson D. to review the objectives of the institution under a detailed collaborative and inquiry into its operations. This must a step succeeding a more appropriate one of enlightening the top management on the benefits of the new approaches proposed by Ms. Tabitha. This must be done through a consistent reference to the various conflict management approaches brought together, thus; compromising, integrative and attitudinal approaches. Bibliography Barnes, B. (2007). Conflict resolution education in the Asian Pacific. Conflict Resolution Quarterly , 55–60. Barton, J., Stephens, J. & Haslett, T. (2009). Action research: its foundations in open systems thinking and relationship to the scientific method. Systemic Practice and Action Research , 475–488. Burgess, H.& Burgess, G. (2006). Intractability and the frontier of the field. Conflict Resolution Quarterly , 177–186. Emma, P. & Shaun, T. (2010). An Analysis of the Use and Success of Online Recruitment Methods in the UK. Human Resource Management Journal , 257-274. Fan, Y. (2007). Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice. Baijing: Tsinghua University Press. George, B. (2009). The Human Resources Strategic Management. Review of 968 International Comparative Management , 968-975. Hill. (2005). International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace. McGraw Hill. Leach, W. (2006). Collaborative public management and democracy: evidence from western watershed watershed. Public Administration Review 66 , 100-110. Michael, S., Andrew, M., Tara, C. & Joakim, K. (2009). Estimating War Deaths: An Arena of Contestation. Journal of Conflict Resolution , 934-950. Parkin, J. & Plant, H. (2008). Editorial: operational research in government. Journal of the Operational Research Society , 59-147. Rosenhead, J. (2009). Reflections on fifty years of operational research. Journal of the Operational Research Society , S5-S15. Smith, D. (2007). A map of peace and conflict studies in U.S. undergraduate colleges and universities. Conflict Resolution Quarterly , 145–151. Ya, L., Zhichang, Z. & Catherine, M. (2012). Learning from Conflict Resolution: An Opportunity to Systems Thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science , 209–220. Read More