How to build teams

Abstract

Team building conflict resolution has always been a key component of effective teamwork within
organizations. For successful conflict resolution, it is essential to possess the qualities of well-
organized and efficient team building skills within the organizations. A team can elucidate conflicts
by achieving desirable outcomes such as (1) Stronger relationships, (2) Learning, and (3)
Agreement. Conducting the suitable exercises in an organizational atmosphere can guarantee the
success of conflict resolution.

Conflict Resolution in the Workplace

The five conflict resolving styles will serve as an excellent technique for deciding conflict
resolution. During the formation of teams, these methods assure that the company will progress
and will be strong in the future. This technique is extremely beneficial for any organization.
However, conflicts erupt invariably, and they should be resolved. If a team is not just a group of
people but a real team with set goals and objectives, it has powerful potential for overcoming any
complex conflict that may occur. Three worthy and desirable results can be concluded from
conflict: (1) Agreement, (2) Strong Relationships, and (3) Learning.

When the conflict comes to an end, the sides should consensually come to an agreement in order
to fully resolve the conflict. It is rather important that the agreement should be fair and
reasonable. It is not beneficial if one of the parties feels deceived or unjustly treated. As a result of
unbalancing the agreement, serious conflicts may arise in the future. Fair and equitable
agreements are incomparable. An agreement, which gives a feeling of defeat or of being exploited,
will aspire to multiply resentment and, thus, a successive conflict. When the appropriate
agreement displays achievement in the end of the conflicts, this proves stronger relationship.
Good agreements enable to build bridges of trust and goodwill for future benefits. Besides,
conflicting parties who confide in each other are more likely to retain their hold in the bargain.
Worthy agreements allow the parties to develop a stronger sense of favor and trust for each
other. This will result in greater chances and each party will fulfill their obligations as planned
(Bartunek, 1992).

After the agreement, learning is the final attempt to build a strong relationship. There is
always something to learn from mistakes. Functional conflict can encourage creative problem
solving and greater self-awareness. In the practice of management, handling conflicts will be more
successful if the participants are willing to learn the subject and study all the possible
consequences. Knowledge of the techniques and concepts is rather necessary, but there is no
replacement for hands-on practice. In a disputable world, there are plenty of opportunities to
practice conflict management (Kinicki, 2009).

Simply because conflicts are usually settled down it is not justified to state that learning is
impossible. The learning outcome enables both parties to achieve and find out something new
from previous mistakes. For resolving conflicts and gaining advantages, successful Conflict
Resolution exercises must take place (Bartunek, 1992).
In an organizational atmosphere, the five conflict-resolving styles are the necessary techniques to
provide Conflict Resolution. These five handling styles include: (1) Integrating (Problem Solving),
(2) Obliging (Smoothing), (3) Dominating (forcing), (4) Avoiding and (5) Compromising.

Integrating or Problem Solving is an effective tool for resolving conflicts that pertains to some
misunderstanding. In this style, people tackle the issue and jointly identify the problem, weigh and
generate alternative solutions, and finally arrive at the solution.

Integration is suitable for complex problems, plagued by misinterpretation. Integration’s main

assets are that it leaves a long lasting influence because it concerns the essential problems and not
just the minor conflict factors. No doubt, it can be a labor-consuming technique but it is highly
effective for team.

Obliging, also known as smoothing, is another technique for resolving conflict. It is applied when
people overlook their own interests so as to meet the interests of the other party. This style
stresses for resolving differences while underlining commonalties. Smoothing can be an
appropriate conflict resolving strategy when it is feasible to receive something in exchange. Its
strongpoint is that, it promotes the coordination among the participating individuals. However, it
is a temporary solution due to the fact that it never resolves the occurring problem (Costantino,
1996).

After the smoothing style comes Dominating or forcing technique. This style demands egoism in
the sense that some people have much bigger concern for themselves with little attention to
another party. Though it is not a popular style, it forces agreements during times when adverse
solutions demand execution. Its strength lies in the fact that it can save a lot of time; although,
some people will be disappointed in the end. This technique is popularly described by forcing
because it leans on authority to force compliance. This style is suitable when a dead end is near
and the issue is minor, or an unpopular solution needs implementation (Papero, 1996).

The next conflict-resolving style is avoiding. This technique implies either peaceful retreat from the
problem or suppression of the problem. Avoidance is suitable in trivial issues or if confrontation
cost outweighs the advantages of resolving the conflict. This style is useful when petty issues
prevail and some parties divert attention from them so as to focus more on the issues that matter.
An advantage of this technique is that it can buy some time during uncertain and problematic
conditions. But still this method is nothing more but a temporary fix where the issue is weak.

The last style of conflict resolution is compromising. Compromising is a technique when both
parties agree to work mutually. This is a ‘give and take’ approach requiring reasonable concern for
oneself and others. This technique is suitable when parties possess equal power or have opposite
goals. The compromise method is unsuitable as its overuse can lead to ineffectual actions (Kinicki,
2009).

Conclusion

All five Conflict-Resolving Techniques have their suitable times of when they should be
implemented to quash issues. Each and every situation differs from one another, and that is why it
is necessary to know which style, or styles, will be suitable to practice. Integrating and
compromising apparently are the most worthy methods to emphasize as they deliver the most
productive results. In an organizational atmosphere, practicing these styles can bring favorable
outcomes in conflict resolution.

References

Bartunek, J. M., Kolb, D. M., & Lewicki, R.J. (1992). Bringing conflict out from behind the scenes.
Hidden Conflict in Organizations. London: SAGE Publications.
Costantino, C. A., & Merchant, C. S. (1996). Designing conflict management systems. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kinicki, A. and Kreitner, R. (2009).Organizational behavior; Key concepts, skills & best practices
(4th Ed.). McGraw-Hill Publishing.

Papero, D. V. (1996). Anxiety in organizations. The Emotional Side of Organizations.