A case study of the Personal Investment Pty LtdExecutive SummaryThe Personal Investment Pty Limited situated in Sydney is experiencing a catastrophe due to the employment of an employee called Tabitha. This catastrophe is related to the continuous disagreements that the partners of the organization have had because they do not agree to Tabitha’s ways of doing things in the organization. According to the mangers of the organization, Tabitha is not fit for the job basing on the fact that she is not the sort of employee who stays in a job for a long period of time.
This is evident in her curriculum vitae as it states that in seven years she had worked with four firms thus, according to them, this is not a good record for a person seeking for a job. Conflict can be divided into three; the system conflict, bureaucratic conflict and bargaining conflict (Taylor 2010). Personal Investment Pty Limited is a good example of an organization that is experiencing the system type of conflict. This is the type of conflict that involves individuals in an organization at an equal level.
That is, the individuals are of the same rank and thus, share the same goals in the organization. In this case, the sources of the conflict at PI are the different views that the managers have about the new employee, Tabitha. The Barnard-Simon model which involves the aspects of inducements and contributions would be appropriate for this case study. This model also corresponds to the views of the balance theory of conflict. The balance theory asserts that. In every conflict, there should be a balance in the way conflict is managed.
For instance, managing the conflict might involve altering the relationships in the company and at the same time changing the policy of the company too (Fisher 2010). According to Maccoby & Scudder (2011), they provide fives steps to managing conflict and they include; anticipate, prevent, identify, manage and resolve. These steps act as a guideline to managing conflict in an organization and the managers are advised to use these steps in order to put their firms in order. Basing on the fact that, the conflict in PI is as a result of dissension among the mangers, a number of things need to be considered in order to avoid further conflicts.
For instance, the C. E.O. need to consider the views of his fellow partners in the business by first of all getting rid of the main obstacle, Tabitha, the unwanted employee. Secondly, the partners need to come up with a lasting solution that would not compromise the company’s reputation but rather maintain its name in the investment market. Working as a team is the surest way to the success of an organization (Huo et al.
2005). Thus, when the all the people in the organization are able to consider each other’s opinion, the activities in the firm will be performed without any hitches. IntroductionConflict refers to the disagreement that arises between two individuals or a group of people (Myers & Larson 2005). Several reasons can be connected to the occurrence of a conflict and it is usually a common thing to encounter people in an organization disagree because of a difference in opinions concerning the firm.
Thus, there are two types of conflicts; substantive and affective conflicts. These two types of conflicts affect both individuals and groups of people. The affective type of conflict is one that is personal and this includes the disagreements that involve personal issues between individuals in a firm. It is an emotional type of conflict because it touches on people’s personal lives. On the other hand, substantive conflict is the type of conflict that is based on issues concerning an organization, for instance, ideas. In this case, the individuals involved disagree due to reasons concerning the management of the company or firm.