Conflict management in the workplace By: Howard Badler Conflict management seems to be the buzzword in a number of articles that

I have read recently and I am seeing more and requests for conflict management training. Firstly you need to understand the definition of a conflict. Read on... A conflict can be defined as an ongoing state of hostility between two or more people or groups. Conflict management on the other hand is the short or long-term management process used to resolve issues where either party is being stubborn, inflexible, difficult, or whatever.

In most instances, conflicts between staff members and managers are silent. Staff members do not express their views or feelings of conflict openly in front of their immediate manager and prefer to voice their concerns or bad feelings about their manager to their colleagues, family members or friends. If you are currently facing a conflict situation in your working environment, have you looked at the root cause of this conflict?

There are a number of sources of conflict and here are just a few: Poor communication channels. Friction between two or more people/departments. Friction between employee and manager. Lack Job recognition and employee development. Lack of support from management. Operational changes to business. Lack of information. Lack of resources. Salary negotiation deadlocks.

What a manager should be doing!

The factors above influence conflict situations from occurring. As a manager you should have measures in place to avoid these types of situations occurring. These factors mentioned above are just a few that occur mainly in the business world.

Poor communication channels lead to employees feeling frustrated as changes that occur in the company are not communicated from top to bottom. A poor relationship between employees or managers and employees leads to a feeling frustration amongst the lower ranks which later results in a conflict situation when the employee vents their frustration verbally.

Placing effective quality management processes and procedures in place as well as developing a good relationship with your employees will lessen the risk of a conflict situation occurring.

Techniques for managing conflicts I have developed a process called the 5 A's technique of managing conflicts are they are as follows: Assessment. Acknowledgement. Attitude. Action. Analysis.

Assessment The assessment phase is the investigative stage when dealing with conflict situations. In the assessment phase you need to investigate and gather all information related to the conflict. These will include the following: What is the conflict? Who is responsible for the conflict? Is there a history of conflicts with this person / department?

Acknowledgement Once you have conducted a thorough assessment you need to acknowledge the conflict. If a conflict exists between a manager and an employee, the manager must inform the employee of the conflict at hand and advise them of the procedure for resolution of the conflict.

At this point the manager must begin the formal conflict management resolution protocols which include the following: Arrange a meeting between themselves and the employee. Inform the employee of the time, date and venue for the meeting both verbally and in writing by means of an email request for a meeting. Inform the employee that they may appoint a facilitator to act on their behalf during the meeting. This would only occur if there were hostile interactions between the employee and their manager. Send the employee an agenda for the meeting. Human resources labour representative should be present at the meeting.

If for example there was a conflict between two departments, the same would apply as above however you would nominate an independent facilitator to chair the meeting to ensure that it does not get hijacked or detoured.

Attitude Both parties must participate in the process with the right attitude. Going into a conflict management situation with a negative approach has a strong possibility of failing. The attitude must be one of wanting to resolve the issue at hand and clear a way forward so that both parties can continue working together.

Action During the resolution period of resolving a conflict a fair number of action points will be recorded which must be completed in an acceptable timeframe. Taking action and giving feedback are the two critical key success factors. If you do not take the necessary action the conflict situation will resurface on a higher scale.

An example of this might be where a manager and employee have a conflict between them. The facilitator advises that they should conduct a one on one session weekly to build on their relationship. The action point is to conduct the one on one. Failing to do so will result in a conflict situation. Both the manager and employee will have the opportunity to give one another feedback.

Analysis Once the conflict situation has been resolved, it should be analysed to determine what caused the conflict situation to begin with and what measures can be put in place to stop this type of situation from reoccurring. The problem in most conflict situations today is that no post conflict management analysis takes place.

In conclusion Develop and implement a sound quality management function and improve your one on one interaction with your employees and conflicts within your department will become a thing of the past. Communication is the key most important ingredient for avoiding conflict situations.

The basics of conflict management

Conflict occurs when two or more viewpoints are contradictory in nature. It usually concerns a person's values or perspectives and it may occur as an interpersonal conflict, when the person does not abide by own values or as an external conflict when the person feels that own values are threatened from a third party. More generally, conflict may be the result of discomfort about the unknown or lack of fulfillment. In all above cases conflict is inevitable, but not necessarily bad.

In the context of an organization, people keep away from conflict because they feel that their underlying irritation may go out of control or that they cannot assert their views and feelings positively. In that case, organizational members endure an interpersonal conflict in the effort to avoid open conflict with other organizational members and jeopardize effective communication.

On the other hand, there are cases that conflict is required. Through healthy conflict, organizational members learn to address problems, to participate in their solution, to recognize the appropriate issues and to value the people who facilitate organizational alignment.

Therefore, one could conclude that conflict per se is not necessarily bad. Instead, poor conflict management is the problem. And this is true.

Why conflict occurs?

In the context of organizational alignment conflict is often the result of poor and ineffective communication. The failure to construct a two-way process through which employees' achievements are recognized and appreciated, results in employees being uninformed of organizational developments, while feeling undervalued, distrusted and disrespected.

When employees do not know what they are doing and why, they lose their trust to the organization, doubt its practices and prefer organizational inertia. In this case, conflict is a major problem because it hinders productivity and lowers morale. In such an environment leadership plays also an important role. Inconsistency at any level in the organization makes employees feel ignored and misunderstood by management. Then, more conflicts may occur, causing even inappropriate behaviors.

What managers need to do?

To ensure effective conflict management, organizations need to incorporate key managerial actions within the context of organizational structure. Managers need primarily to review job descriptions in order to ensure that job roles do not conflict. The development of procedures for routine tasks with the input of employees would motivate employees as they would feel that their contribution to organizational performance is essential and publicly recognized.

The conduct of basic training of employees in regards to interpersonal communications, conflict management and delegation would result in new initiatives and in intentionally-built relationships between organizational members. Managers should meet with their subordinates regularly and ask about challenges, problems and issues. They should also ask for regular reports about accomplished issues and plans for the upcoming period.

Managers should also focus on facts. There is a positive relationship between reliance on facts and low interpersonal conflict. Focusing on facts allows managers to focus on the real issues involved in strategic decision making and not on the personalities of the employees.

Also, the use of alternative solutions diffuses conflict by shifting the process over a range of choices, avoiding black and white solutions. The use of humor creates a collaborative framework and it works as a releasing mechanism during the stressful strategic decision making process. Within this context, democratic leadership maintains a balanced power structure avoiding forced consensus.

Alternative inferences

Conflict may lead to organizational alignment and consensus under certain circumstances. We should not forget that workplace is driven by interactionism, which supports the existence of conflicts. Yet, the realization, the identification and the elaboration on own character traits that could put organizational effectiveness at stake is used to enhance employee training, management, and organizational performance.

Conflict in team structures can be productive if team members do not delay decision making for engaging in interpersonal conflicts. Although conflict is considered negative, lack of conflict implies apathy, which leads to inertia. In this case, integration of own character traits with the team consensus is the key to effective conflict management. In return, organizational flexibility reflected on the synergy of team members contributes to teamwork.

INTORDUCTION

I work for an organization called Hallmark Trading Company. This company provides services such as capital ventures, new and used equipment sales and purchases, and a full line truck center. In the course of doing business, sometimes conflict will arise. In this paper, I will first explain what conflict is, the different types of conflict and then the different styles of management used to handle conflict. My personal style of management will also be shown according to the assessment tool taken from the workbook Organizational Behavior 7th addition written by Schermerhorn JR., Hunt, and Osborn. I will explain how this style contradicts with the style of management in my organization but how the style they use may be more effective.

CONFLICT Conflict is something that happens often in my organization. However, there are different styles to manage conflict and some are more effective than others. Before I explain these different styles, it is important to understand what conflict is. Conflict occurs whenever disagreements exist in a social situation over issues of substance or whenever emotional antagonisms create frictions between individuals or groups (Schermerhorn, Hunt, Osborn, 2002 pg.127, Conflict). There are two distinctive types of conflict, substantive conflict and emotional conflict.

Substantive conflict happens when one person fundamentally disagrees with another person or group in the course of doing business. For example, my boss bought a package of step vans used in delivering bakery products. He wanted to market the trucks for electrical and mechanical applications where I thought they should be remarketed for another bakery operation. This is just a disagreement of opinions, but management still has to develop a way to manage this type of conflict, which can be very challenging depending on the personalities involved.

Emotional conflict intrudes into the feelings of a situation, such as anger, mistrust, dislike, fear, resentment, and the like. This is commonly called clash of personalities (Schermerhorn, Hunt, Osborn, 2002, pg.127,). This type of conflict can sometimes be more draining, and take away from the more important work that needs to be done. Usually this happens between co-workers who may not like one another, or with customers who are not dealt with properly. I have witnessed both types of conflict in my organization and the different styles used in managing these types of conflicts.

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLES

According to Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn there are five ways to manage conflict. The first style I want to write about is Smoothing or Accommodation style. This is when a manager agrees with the other side of the conflicting situation. He/she smoothes the conflict over by maintaining superficial harmony. Second is Collaboration and Problem Solving. This is when a manager trouble shoots the problem and then works through the differences to make it an acceptable situation for everyone. The third is Avoidance. With this style the manager would stay neutral at all costs, trying not to participate in the situation at all. The fourth is Competition and Authoritative Command. This style of management is derived from the term I like to use as the God style. When a manager forces the opposite party to agree with him/her. They use their position to win due to their authority. The last style is Compromise. This style is when the manager seeks acceptable rather than optimal solutions so no one totally wins or loses.

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLES IN MY ORGANIZATION There is not one style that is used as a guideline in my organization. Each departmental manager uses the style that is conformed by his or her personality. The CEO of the organization tends to use the competition and authoritative command style. He is an ex-military man who has this style instilled into his personality. He is the boss, so we need to do it his way. This is a very counter productive way to manage conflict. He makes us use his philosophies in decisions we make rather than opening the conflict up for debate. The my way or the highway attitude. This style of management forces more conflict between the departments and resentment towards him. Even though I do not agree with this style of managing conflict it has been a successful style for him. He has been able to maintain a high level of integrity through the same style. Meaning, although he forces his views and decisions on his employees those decisions and views are mostly good for the company, just sometimes bad for morale.

MY STYLE OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT In the organizational behavior workbook 7th addition, there is an assessment test that helps the person taking it understand which style he or she uses. It asks a variety of questions that help pinpoint the style best suited for his/her personality. The style that was best suited for my personality was Collaboration and Problem Solving. According to the text this is the best style to handle conflict. The difference between this and the style that my CEO uses is that I genuinely have a desire to find a solution for everyones concerns by working through differences to find the problem so everyone gains as a result. His desire is that everyone should think the way he does for every situation even though everyones views are different.

CONCLUSION This paper has explained what conflict is and the two types of conflict there are. It listed each style of management used to deal with conflict and which styles work best. It also has explained which style is used by my organization Hallmark Trading Company and what style I use personally according to the assessment tool in the Organizational Behavior Workbook 7th addition. I enjoyed learning more about the different styles of managing conflict while writing this paper. My desire is now to be able to recognize conflict when it happens and use a style of management that will best resolve the issues in the conflict.

AdvancedWriters.com is a professional custom writing service which can provide high school, college and university students with 100% original custom written essays, research papers, term papers, dissertations, courseworks, homeworks, book reviews, book reports, projects, presentations and other assignments of top quality. More than 550 professional Ph.D. and Masters academic writers. Feel free to order a custom written paper online on any topic, in any discipline and with any deadline you need. Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Overview of Workgroup: Criterion Catalysts & Technologies

Brief History

Function and Goals of the Company

Innovations

Workforce

Analysis of Workgroup Performance and Satisfaction

Methodology

Results

Test 1: Measuring Team Type

Test 2: Measuring Team Leadership

Test 3: Measuring Member Satisfaction

Test 4: Measuring Team Satisfaction

Test 5: Job Enrichment Evaluation

Test 6: Measuring Organizational Support

10

Test 7: Resource Assessment

11

Test 8: Team Decision-Making Intervention

11

Recommendations for Improvements for Workgroup

13

Performance and Satisfaction

Conclusion

15

Executive Summary

It is a given fact that dynamism is one of the key elements in the growth and operation of every company or organization, and this dynamism causes a variety of changes, which affects different aspects in the workplace. Dynamism in a company is important, for it serves as the basis for companies and business organizations to innovate and improve their different systems used in the company. With the existence of changes in different aspects of business, market, technology and society, members of business organizations are given the chance to think creatively and come up with strategies to cope with the needed changes.

It is also a given fact that dynamism and its consequent changes may lead to conflicts or crises in the company. Despite the fact that conflicts and problems are part of the system of a company, the immediate changes can sometimes cause a huge impact on the company. However, due to the fact that every organization faces a variety of problems in relation to management, marketing and employee development, it is essential that a company or an organization find ways to develop and improve management in resolving conflicts and crises. The ability of the company or business organization to devise and come up with strategies and solutions to problems is beneficial in adapting and coping with the changes presented caused by a variety of factors.

With this information at hand, this paper seeks to study and discuss a specific working group in a company and address its problems, in relation to conflict management and workplace dynamics. The significance of these concepts will be evaluated in relation to its relevance in the workplace environment, which is assessed using a variety of group analysis tests or diagnostics. Moreover, the application of concepts and the results of the diagnostics will be used to assess the overall satisfaction of employees belonging in a specific group or team in the company studied.

Group Analysis Report: Conflict Management and Workplace Dynamics

Introduction

It is an accepted fact that changes are permanent, which causes a variety of modification and adjustments on the part of business organizations and companies. Changes are being brought about by the dynamism and the interrelation of a variety of internal and external factors in the society and economy, and these changes enable the company or business organization to adapt to the situation. Because of this dynamism, many conflicts or crises are being encountered, which lead many organizations to develop and improve their management and communication. In relation to this, (1990) reports that conflict is a severe problem in modern organizations, which wastes valuable human resources that would be better directed to other activities, including the primary work of the organization.

Nonetheless, although most of the time conflicts produce negative effects, its existence is distinguished as a means of generating major benefits as well, for conflict between individuals or groups within an organization often helps unveil persistent problems and undergo careful analysis. In this light, conflict serves as a means for effective and needed change, for facilitating communication and coordination (1990).

With the presence of conflicts and crises, it is essential to come up and devise efficient and effective management strategies to address the problems in an organization or specific group in an organization, including teamwork, changes in workplace roles, communication, group development, and lack of motivation. The proper application and utilization of the concepts regarding conflict management and workplace dynamics can be used to address these problems, and with its use, the organization can continue to function effectively in the industry. The objective of this paper is to address the problems of a specific group in an organization, conduct group diagnostics, and relate its results to the concepts of conflict management and workplace dynamics.

Overview of Workgroup

The organization in focus in this paper is Criterion Catalysts and Technologies Company. It has been reported that in 1988, three major international catalysts businesses, namely, Shell Oil Company, Shell International Chemical Company, and American Cyanamid Company, merged and created a single company, which is the Criterion Catalyst Co LP, and became a leading supplier of refining and petrochemical catalysts (2006). Its more than 50 years of experience in

developing, manufacturing, testing, marketing and servicing catalysts are used in different types of hydroprocessing operations (2006).

Criterion Catalyst & Technologies is an international company that supplies catalysts, process technologies and catalyst services for a wide range of refining applications, and it offers a variety of process technologies, which can be packaged with catalysts, in creating a complete, optimized solution for any hydroprocessing problem or supplied independently (2006). Being regarded as the worlds largest supplier of hydroprocessing catalysts, including catalysts for hydrotreating, hydrocracking, hydrogenation, isomerization and naphtha reforming, it coordinates and works with refiners in almost every part of the world. Due to the companys huge responsibility, it tries to live up to its goal in helping each customer realize greater value from ones hydroprocessing assets by providing superior catalysts and customized technical advice. For Criterion to attain this goal, it sets its sights on building lasting relationships and a teamwork environment with each customer (2006). As the leading innovator of hydroprocessing catalysts and processes for many years, one of the major events in the companys history is the introduction of the SynSat process 10 years ago, which was the first process to enable low sulfur, low aromatics diesel production at moderate pressure and remains the best choice for making the highest quality diesel. In addition to this is the innovation on fixedbed and moving-bed reforming catalysts that have given the companys customers rapid paybacks through higher gasoline yields and lower operating costs. Innovation also includes the introduction of the Century and Centinel processes, which enabled the company to produce catalysts with superior initial activity and allowed customers to maximize the use of their hydrotreaters ( 2006).

Moreover, to be able for Criterion Catalysts & Technologies to perform these tasks, responsibilities and goals, the company needs to have productive and efficient employees to be delegated the various work in the company. With the companys aim to achieve the customers maximum benefit, Criterion Catalyst &Technologies has a large number of highly skilled technical staffs located around the world. The company also has the worlds largest database of commercial performance results, computer models and pilot plant testing facilities to help the management analyze a groups performance and develop the right plan to maximize financial benefits. In addition, the company focuses on sustainable development to integrate the economic, environmental, and societal aspects of the company, and establish objectives and plans to protect the workers and the environment, build the companys reputation as a primary partner and supplier, and achieve sustained financial growth and success ( 2006).

However, although the company focuses on the sustainable development of its employees and the environment, some problems can still be encountered, such as in its engineering department. Due to the high demand of work in the Criterion Catalysts & Technologies, many aspects in the development of employees are being neglected. One of these aspects is lack of effective and efficient communication, which results to the underdevelopment of teamwork and team interrelations. Moreover the engineering department can be seen as being underperforming, as each member of the team lacks the motivation and the desire to strive better in working for the department. With the lack of communication, teamwork, and motivation, the team cannot effectively and efficiently contribute to the productivity of the whole business organization. The interaction of these three factors contributes to the overall satisfaction of the employees, which serves as their driving force in working for the company. In turn, satisfaction leads to job enrichment, which develops the potential of the member of the team in terms of performance and interaction. Overall satisfaction then, depends on different factors interacting in the management of the company. Moreover, another problem concerning the teams workplace dynamics is the managers style of leadership. The problem with leadership leads us to evaluate the ability and skills of the manager or team leader, who is responsible for motivating and managing his team. Another factor to consider is the teams group cohesiveness or the degree to which members are attracted to one another and share group goals ( ). Due the problems encountered by the engineering team of the company, the members team cohesiveness is not so effective, which leads them to fail in terms of promoting efficient communication and interrelations. For this reason, a group or team diagnostic or analysis will be made to find the reasons behind the groups decline of performance in relation to teamwork, communication and lack of motivation.

Analysis of Workgroup Performance and Satisfaction

To be able to assess the performance and satisfaction of the employees in the Engineering Department of the Criterion Catalysts & Technologies, several tests or diagnostics have been conducted. These diagnostic tests also seek to know the

motivation level of the employees in order for them to exhibit excellent performance.

The method for the assessment includes the distribution of specific questionnaires to the members of the engineering team. Eight different questionnaires were distributed and answered separately by the members of the group. The engineering group has twenty members, who all participated in the diagnostic test. Each member were given the questionnaires, and answered simultaneously in order for the whole team to discuss the items in each questionnaire, if needed.

The data were compiled and graphed to easily determine and evaluate the responses of the participants.

Group Analysis Diagnostic 1: Measuring Team Type

The first group analysis diagnostic done was the Measuring Team Type Diagnostic, which provides ratings on each dimensions in knowing what type of team the members believe they are ( 1999). The three dimensions include Crew Items, Task Force Items, and Standing Team Items, and each dimension has 8 items to consider and rate. Results of the first group diagnostic indicate that the range of the scores of the three dimensions have no significant difference, showing an average of 21 for Crew Items, 24 for Task Force Items, and 27 for Standing Team Items respectively. Graph of the results are shown below.

In addition, the results show that the majority of the team members believe that their team is a Standing Team, where team members have multiple and independent goals, and having sparse and sporadic feedbacks. In relation to this, the engineering team can also be regarded as a Project and Development Team, which exhibits high differentiation and low integration ( 2002).

Group Analysis Diagnostic 2: Measuring Team Leadership

The second group analysis diagnostic done was the Measuring Team Leadership diagnostic, which determines what type of leadership the team leader of the engineering team has. The team leader can either exhibit a Coach or Facilitator Role or a Controller or Planner Role. Results show that the team members of the engineering team perceive the engineering team leader as more of a Controller or Planner, than a Coach or Facilitator. Numerical data also show that the range of the scores between the two criteria has no significant difference, showing an average score of 12 for the Coach or Facilitator Role dimension, and an average score of 16 for the Controller or Planner Role dimension. This is shown in the graph below.

This just means that based on the need at that time, the engineering team requires the guidance and support of a Coach and not a Controller-type of leader. This also means that the engineering team needs a new type of leadership, for them to be able to function more effectively and efficiently. In essence, the data shows that the team leader deals more effectively with team member conflicts, plans and organizes tasks for the team, and coordinates the teams work activities, than focusing on communicating a clear purpose and identifying available resources to assist the whole team (1999).

Group Diagnostic 3: Measuring Member Satisfaction

The third group analysis diagnostic done was the Measuring Member Satisfaction diagnostic, which determines the satisfaction of the members of the team in relation to the team handling, decision-making, skills used, and job satisfaction. Results of the scores will be interpreted and evaluated using averages, which range from the lowest score of 1 to the highest score of 5. Member satisfaction scores falling between 1 and 2 would be considered low; member satisfaction scores falling around 3 would be considered average; and member satisfaction scores in the 4 and 5 range would be considered high ( 1999).

From the averages of the scores, results show that most of the team members are not satisfied with the performance of the team. Nine individuals answered that they are not satisfied with the team handling, decision-making, skill use and job satisfaction, by giving the range of 2. Seven individuals gave the range of 3, which corresponds to Neither Agree nor Disagree. Three individuals from the team gave the range of 4, which corresponds to Agree Somewhat, and only one gave the range of 5, which indicates his or her total satisfaction from the performance of the team. The graph below shows the results of the diagnostic.

From the scores given by the members of the engineering team, it can be deduced that most of the members are not satisfied with how the team is being handled and are not satisfied with their jobs. On the other hand, some members fall on average satisfaction, as given by the score of 3, and only a handful has a high member satisfaction. From the data, the team leader must be alarmed, for his or her team is not anymore satisfied with their team performance. This should serve as

a basis for changing and improving the performance of the team leader and its members.

Group Diagnostic 4: Measuring Team Satisfaction

The fourth group analysis diagnostic is the Measuring Team Satisfaction diagnostic, which determines the rate of satisfaction of the engineering team as a whole, in relation to working with the team, reaching goals, and teamwork. Similar with the Measuring Member Satisfaction diagnostic, the results of the scores were interpreted and evaluated using averages, which range from the lowest score of 1 to the highest score of 5. Member satisfaction scores falling between 1 and 2 would be considered low; member satisfaction scores falling around 3 would be considered average; and member satisfaction scores in the 4 and 5 range would be considered high ( 1999).

Results of the diagnostic show that as a whole, the team is satisfied with its performance, as shown in the diagram that majority of their members gave the average score of 3. However, those team members who gave the score of 2 are also plenty, which still makes the whole team not completely satisfied with their performance. Likewise, this data must also serve as a basis for the team leader and for the whole team, to evaluate and assess their job design, teamwork and communication, which are key elements in sustaining an effective and an efficient team. Results of the fourth diagnostic are shown below.

Group Analysis Diagnostic 5: Job Enrichment Evaluation

The fifth diagnostic done was the Job Enrichment Evaluation diagnostic, which gives importance to team skills, work importance, outcome meaningfulness, team autonomy, and work feedback. Through this diagnostic, team members will be able to assess their skills, work importance, the outcome of their work, and their work feedback. Similarly, team members are asked to rate each item in the diagnostic depending on their honest opinion. Results of the data show that majority of the engineering team members gave the answer of 3, which corresponds to Neither Agree or Disagree. The second highest rating is 2, which corresponds to Disagree Somewhat, and only a few members gave a high score of 4 and 5, which corresponds to Agree Somewhat and Completely Agree. The table below shows the results of the diagnostic.

These data will be helpful because from the results, it can be seen that many of the members have low confidence on their performance based on their answers. This just shows that most team members perceive their work as being not completely giving out meaningful outcomes and not focused on developing the work of the team as a whole. In a way, the results exhibit the lack of teamwork and motivation among the members of the engineering team.

Group Analysis Diagnostic 6: Measuring Organizational Support

The sixth diagnostic done was the Measuring Organizational Support diagnostic, which shows the support of the whole team regarding the development, improvement and work outcome of the whole team. Averages of the scores of the data were used to determine the members opinion on the teams organizational support. Averages can range from the lowest score of 5 to the highest score of 35. A score below 14 indicates that the organizational context is not very supportive of teamwork; scores between 14 and 28 indicate that the organizational context of the

team is somewhat supportive of teamwork; and a score above 28 indicates that the organizational context is highly supportive of teamwork ( 1999). Results are shown in the table below.

Results of the average scores of the diagnostic shows that majority of the members of the engineering team gave scores between the range of 14 and 28, which means that they perceive that organizational context of their team is somewhat supportive of teamwork. Technically, the opinion of the members regarding organizational support passes their standards. However, some members do not think so, as some gave scores lesser than 14. Similarly, only a few members gave scores more than 28. This just means that not everybody believes on the ability of the organization to support the whole team.

Group Analysis Diagnostic 7: Resource Assessment

The seventh diagnostic done was the Resource Assessment diagnostic, which assesses the allocation of the organizations resources, namely, physical, financial, time, and human resources. Results of the diagnostic show that majority of the members of the engineering team agree and believe that their company are more than capable of providing them with their needed resources, which are shown in the scores of the data, for most of the members gave the score of 4, corresponding to Agree Somewhat. Results are shown in the table below.

With the results, it can be seen that the team members know that their company is more than able to provide them with their needed resources, and this fact somehow gives them the confidence to accomplish their task as a team. In addition, the data just shows that the growth of the whole business organization or company is continuous being evident in efficiently providing its employees with their needed resources, for the sustainability and efficiency of the company also depends on effective and proper resource allocation.

Group Analysis Diagnostic 8: Team Decision-Making Intervention

The last diagnostic done was the Team Decision-Making Intervention diagnostic, which assesses the ability of team members to participate in the decision-making process of the whole team. Results of the diagnostic show that majority of the team members gave the answer of 4, which corresponds to Agree Somewhat. Some members gave the score of 3, which corresponds to Agree or Disagree, while a few gave the answer of 2, which corresponds to Disagree Somewhat. Results of the data are shown in the table below.

From the results of the data, it means that majority of the team members believe that they are allowed to participate in the decision-making process of the team, which is beneficial for all team members, as it boosts each members selfconfidence and help them to develop a critical mind.

Results of Diagnostic 5 to 8

Participant/Diagnostics Job Enrichment Evaluation Measuring Organizational Support Resource Assessment

Team Decision-Making Intervention

Participant 1 4 24 3 4

Participant 2 3 12 4 3

Participant 3 5 16 3 2

Participant 4 3 29 5 3

Participant 5 3 30 4 2

Participant 6 5 18 4 3

Participant 7 4 19 4 3

Participant 8 4 23 4 2

Participant 9 2

27 4 4

Participant 10 2 29 3 4

Participant 11 2 13 3 4

Participant 12 3 19 5 2

Participant 13 5 23 4

Participant 14 3 15 4 4

Participant 15 3 25 4 3

Participant 16 2 28 3 3

Participant 17 3 11 3 4

Participant 18 3 20 4 3

Participant 19 2 24 3 4

Participant 20 2 27 4 3

Recommendations for Improvements for Workgroup Performance and Satisfaction

The differences in the results of the questionnaires prove to show that the members of the team or group have a variety of opinion and perception regarding the leadership and management of their department, which result to different levels of satisfaction. Consequently, from the results of the group diagnostics, it is evident that some conflicts may arise due to some problems regarding teamwork, communication, lack of motivation, and other problems. With these, recommendations will be made for the improvement of the performance of the team or group, and enhance their satisfaction.

With regards to leadership, the team leader of the engineering team must be able to develop effective skills and adopt different styles of leadership, which will be helpful in adapting to several situations, crises, and types of employees in the team. (2000) emphasizes six leadership styles that can be adopted by a team leader or manager to effectively manage his or her team, namely, Authoritative or Charismatic leadership, Affiliative leadership, Democratic leadership, Coaching leadership, Pacesetting leadership, and Coercive leadership. The engineering team leader can adopt any of the leadership style depending on the need of the situation, or all of it for more effective results. It can be recommended that for the engineering team, it would be best to adopt the Coaching type of leadership, which is needed by the team members, to be able to facilitate effective communication and assist them in teamwork. This style of leadership will be effective for the members of the engineering team are receptive to learning and information. Moreover, with effective leadership, the engineering team leader will be able to manage diversity and conflict in the workplace, which are means to successful operations and effective public service ( 2003).

In relation to motivation, several aspects can be addressed, including doing an interesting work, communicating firm mission, imparting job significance, knowing life interests, and developing values and interests, for these factors determine the overall motivation and in turn the satisfaction of employees. To address the problem with job design, the team leader can implement an effective job redesign, which includes job rotation, job enlargement, and job enrichment. (1997) states that with job rotation or the periodic shifting of a worker from one job to another, can put more variety and more knowledge to the job of the employees, and is very helpful to improve their performance and reducing turnover if the new job fits with employees life interests. In addition, with job enlargement or

increasing the number of tasks a worker performs but keeping all of the tasks at the same level of difficulty and responsibility, also adds variety to the workers job, and increases motivation. With job enrichment, team members will be able to have more control over their work, while planning their own work schedules, deciding how the work should be performed, setting key production and defect goals, checking their own work, and learning new skills (1997). The implementation of these three strategies will be effective for each team member to have a change in perspective in doing new roles and having new responsibilities in the team. With its implementation, each team member will be focusing in doing new challenging work roles that would allow them to improve in new aspects and become exposed to new kinds of work. Job redesign would be effective in motivating the employees because this would enable them to have new work roles that would help them grow individually and as a team. In addition, new work roles would allow each team member to develop, which would help them address work roles and performance dynamics even better, and help address conflicts that would arise. Through the implementation of job redesign, organizational support and resource allocation will also be addressed, which would enable the whole team to exhibit effective teamwork and communication.

Moreover, the team can also set goals, for the simple act of setting goals and starting to work toward them brings its own rewards, and when people get motivated, their general life satisfaction increases (2004). Setting goals for the whole team is effective, as it gives each team member the sense of purpose and importance in team, which leads to increase in motivation and productivity.

The increase in the motivation due to job redesign and applying a more effective leadership style are effective means of increasing the incidence of effecting efficient and effective communication, teamwork, and resolving conflicts within the team because with these means, the team will be able to address all the existing problems they face. In addition, with these means, each member of the team will be able to participate in the discussion and the decision-making process in relation to coming up with solutions and answers to problems. In this way, it would be easier for the engineering team to address crises regarding work dynamics and member conflicts. However, the effectiveness of these strategies will depend on the cooperation of each team member, the coordination of the whole team, and the desire of each member to effectively communicate with each other.

Conclusion

Teams are important aspects of an organization, for they are responsible for performing the various functions of the organization and without teams, the various tasks and responsibilities of the whole organization will not be delegated properly among its members. Similarly, teamwork is important for the increase in the productivity and efficiency of the company. However, the presence of crises and conflicts within the team becomes the source of many changes in relation to leadership, motivation and communication. With this problem, it would be essential to have the whole team undergo team diagnostics, to address a variety of problems and crises concerning interrelationships and management. From the results and the recommendation of the paper, it can be deduced that the team diagnostics done were successful in enabling the whole engineering team to determine different problems, which would enable them to come up with effective solutions and answers.