Manage Conflict Solution could you propose †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Questions: 1.Why it is important that you intervene? 2.What the reason/s may be for this particular difficult behavior? 3.What reward mechanism/s may be put to use which should keep the person from using this behavior? 4.ow you would conduct the conversation with the perpetrator. Provide examples of the sentences or phrases you would use to demonstrate your approach? 5.What strategies you may use to help reduce the frequency of the behavior? 6.Reflect on your proposed solution. What possible improvements to your solution could you propose? Answers: Assessment 1 will be done on the basis of the particular situation given in the Manage conflict handbook. In the given case study, it has been mentioned that the narrator, presumably holding a managerial position in the organization, has witnessed a spat between Sean and Jessica, two of the workers in the organization. The spat started since Sean teased Jessica for being late whereas Jessica takes pride in herself for being always on time. In the given assignment, the following questions have been posed for the narrator to deal with while managing the conflict situation described above. 1. It is important for the manager to intervene since the spat described can take a bad shape in future and consequently affect the team performance (Yen and Teng 2013. It will also be difficult to manage individuals if this leads to fragmentation based upon the two camps the two concerned individuals are in. The whole scenario can transpire into other groups and encourage more of such behaviors (Woodrow and Guest 2014). Subsequently the productivity will be hampered. 2. There can be several possible reasons behind such behavior. One of the reasons may be personal conflicts which appeared to have vengeful outcomes like teasing based on insignificant issues like being late. There can also be dearth of common sense and sense of authority. The role an individual has to play in a job is often not clear to the person or there may be a lack of specification regarding the same. The motive behind behaving in this particular manner may have been driven solely by the will to wield power over the person at the receiving end an incident of bullying in this case. This behavior can also be seen as the exhibition of patriarchal authority since, in this particular case, the perpetrator was a man and the victim was a woman. 3. The perpetrator should not be in any way encouraged for making such behavior at workplace, however, he or she should also not be punished for behaving in this manner since that may be humiliating and make the person feel de-motivated. A monthly feedback program can be implemented. The feedback form should be anonymous and can enable the person giving feedback to take names of a perpetrator. If there is any report against a person or persons and if, after cross-checking, it is found out to have truly occurred; every employee can get bonus points that add to their future appraisal points and increases their chance of promotion (Schyns and Schilling 2013). Not only that, points will be deducted from the perpetrator. This can help management be aware of the perpetrators and take necessary steps and can also alert employees and keep them from behaving badly. 4. Conversation with the perpetrator should be conducted in properly formal tone, without any frankness. Companies Zero Tolerance Policies should be conveyed to the perpetrator. The perpetrator must not be intimidated or humiliated but he or she should know that the consequences of repetition of such behaviors can ultimately cause loss of job. Perpetrator should be informed about possible substantial deduction in salary for behaving badly. Phrases like, Your job may be genuinely at stake! or A large amount of your salary may be deducted! can be used so that they take good care of their behavior. 5. The companies Zero Tolerance Policies can be articulated in clear terms, that is, without any confusion prevailing on the part of the employees. The policies should also connect the code of conduct to possible consequences that may take place for breaching the rules. The reward mechanism can encourage true reporting since that involves incentives, appraisals, promotions and salary hikes. Bad behaviors can be considered as key performance indicators so that the employees keep their outward behavior on check since bad behaviors can hamper the teamwork as well as productive capacity (Klotz and Bolino 2013). Higher authoritys involvement can be encouraged if the situation goes haywire. 6. The solution that has been proposed above apparently has no loopholes that may still give room for a person to get away with foul behavior. The solution has focused heavily upon the incorporation of the financial security of an employee to his or her conduct at workplace (Resick et al. 2013). The solution has also been connected to the appraisal and appraisal is the key to promotions. There may be persistent foul behavior by employees. The possibility is increased if the misconduct is perpetuated by means of involving more individuals and targeting someone who is not very strong emotionally (Cohen et al. 2014). In these instances, feedback report often gets feigned and the victims voice remains unheard. The team leader should keep a vigilant eye on the teams interaction and if there is observed any discrepancy in terms of involvement levels of each member in a team, then a thorough research should be conducted to detect where the problems lie. An alternative plan can be a thorough feedback regarding employees deviations from the proposed code of conduct. The code of conduct can also be improvised and made stringent. References: Cohen, T.R., Panter, A.T., Turan, N., Morse, L. and Kim, Y., 2014. Moral character in the workplace.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,107(5), p.943. Klotz, A.C. and Bolino, M.C., 2013. Citizenship and counterproductive work behavior: A moral licensing view.Academy of Management Review,38(2), pp.292-306. Resick, C.J., Hargis, M.B., Shao, P. and Dust, S.B., 2013. Ethical leadership, moral equity judgments, and discretionary workplace behavior.Human Relations,66(7), pp.951-972. Schyns, B. and Schilling, J., 2013. How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes.The Leadership Quarterly,24(1), pp.138-158. Woodrow, C. and Guest, D.E., 2014. When good HR gets bad results: Exploring the challenge of HR implementation in the case of workplace bullying.Human Resource Management Journal,24(1), pp.38-56. Yen, C.H. and Teng, H.Y., 2013. The effect of centralization on organizational citizenship behavior and deviant workplace behavior in the hospitality industry.Tourism Management,36, pp.401-410.