Managing Virtual Interactions with Theory, Boundaries and Choice

Managing Virtual Interactions with Theory, Boundaries and Choice Dr. Jillian R. Yarbrough, Assistant Professor of Practice of West Texas A&M University, USA ABSTRACT Globalization and technology have combined to create a vast potential of virtual interactions. Where, at one time, employees might interact with a few people face to face in their local environments, technology has created potential now for daily interactions with global stakeholders. With increased channels of communication, organizations are experiencing advances in innovation, creativity and productivity. However, the increased number of interactions, diversity, technology and perspectives also increases the potential for conflict in the workplace. In a global work environment, conflict can now develop in-person, on the phone, via email, twitter, social media, etc. Managers must not only develop conflict management skills for face-to-face interactions and but also for virtual interactions. What does conflict management look like in the virtual team environment? Is conflict among virtual team members resolved in the same way that face-to-face conflict is resolved? The following paper will explore these two management questions. INTRODUCTION In 1965, Bruce Tuckman proposed a model of group development that includes four distinct stages, forming, storming, norming and performing. During the first stage, teams are forming, members are meeting each other and learning about each other’s interests and skills. In the second stage, storming, participants question and challenge team members’ character, performance and validity within the team mission, goals and project scope. Norming, the third stage conflict between team members is resolved and a greater team spirit and unity can be achieved. Finally, the team reaches the performing stage as members focus on achieving and reaching goals. It is notable that Tuckman identifies a common and consistent characteristic of teams as storming. During storming teams engage in conflict, a pull between contradicting impulses, and polarize around interpersonal issues (Smith, 2005). This phase of the team development can be very difficult, with individuals focusing on impressions, seeking respect, proving of value and a battle with emotions. Other group development theorist, have identified similar team development stages. Philip E. Staler, (1966) developed a Theory of Group Development stating groups reenact many of the concerns they face in society each time a new team is formed or developed. Specifically moving through three phases. Phase One, new members experience anxiety over how they will differentiate themselves from other members of the group. Phase Two, members go on the attack questioning the leadership and how group member perspectives can be incorporated into the team philosophy. Phase Three, after the attack, group members can find resolution and begin to work effectively. While Tuckman has conflict at the second of four stages, Staler identifies conflict as the second of three phases. But, both theorist agree, conflict is part of group development and group productivity. As theorists recognize, conflict will be part of the group development process, what can management do to support a team environment that develops through conflict and avoids negative long term consequences? The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 12, Num. 2, December, 2016 issue 1 WHAT IS THE COST OF CONFLICT? “Employee conflicts can be poisonous,” (Ferrazzi, 2012). What starts as a small conflict can result in significant organizational costs, “Some experts believe that unresolved conflict represents the largest reducible cost in many businesses, yet the financial, human and credibility costs of conflict in the workplace are not measured in most organizations and not pro-actively managed” (Buss, 2011). Conflict can be difficult to manage because conflict is a unique experience for each person involved, “Interpersonal conflicts in the workplace may occur in diverse forms, ranging from minor disagreements between co-workers and supervisors to assaults on others, and they may be overt or covert,” (Spector & Jex, 1998). For some, conflicts can be associated with something as minor as a person’s experience of rejection or disrespect (De Dreu & Gelfand, 2008; Meier, Gross, Spector, & Semmer, 2013). While the conflict experience is unique among employees, the cost is high for any organization. Costs can be measured in loss of productivity, loss of employee efficiency and loss of employees. Conflict Reduces Productivity 47% of the HR staff spend 1-10% of their time per week on conflict (Freres, 2013). 30 to 70 percent of a manager’s time is spent simply dealing with employees in conflict (Thomas and Schmid,1976)(Watson and Hoffman, 1996). Managers spend 20-40 percent of their time dealing with conflict (McGuire, 2014). Office workers spend more than two and half hours per week trying to resolve conflict, which translates to $359 billion in losses for U.S. companies every year (Winfrey, 2014). Conflict Reduces Employee Efficiency 88% of Americans cite hostility, desk-rage, and workplace incivility as top concerns in the workplace (Marayelas, 2012). 80% of disputes have a significant impact on the smooth running of business (Center for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR). 25% of employees said that avoiding conflict led to sickness or absence from work (Lawless, 2010). Conflict can result in depressive symptoms (Meier, Semmer, Gross and 2014). Depressive symptoms make people vulnerable to conflict and creates a cycle (Meier, Semmer, Gross and 2014). 10% of employees report that workplace conflict led to project failure (Lawless, 2010). Conflict Results in Loss of Employees Chronic unresolved conflict leads to 50% of all departures (Duxbury and Higgins, 2003). Costs 150 percent of one trained employee’s salary to replace him or her (Philips, 1990). Conflict accounts for up to 90 percent of involuntary departures with the possible exception of staff reductions due to downsizing and restricting (Dana, 2001). 30% of employees said that conflict resulted in someone leaving the company either firing or quitting (Lawless, 2010). Unresolved and unmanaged workplace conflict clearly results in organizational expense. Expense in lost time, lost productivity, lost employees, lost innovation and lost creativity. 2 The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 12, Num. 2, December, 2016 issue TYPES OF CONFLICT If conflict is unavoidable, part of every organization, why is it that some organizations/departments remain productive in spite of ongoing conflict and some organizations/departments struggle for even minimal efficiency? Could the type of workplace conflict be a factor in productivity? Conflict is often categorized in a few categories, functional or dysfunction or interpersonal or intrapersonal. Managers that have the ability to understand conflict categories and facilitate movement towards productive and constructive conflict will be at an advantage. Functional Conflict Functional conflict supports the goals of the group and improves performance. This includes airing problems and releasing tensions. Functional conflict is healthy and constructive and individuals are seeking win-win situations. A disagreement with functional conflict can support positive results for all parties. Positive results of functional conflict can include increased awareness, improved working conditions, improved morale, innovation and improvements. Often functional conflict supports constructive criticism and discussion allowing for compromise and solution. Dysfunctional Conflict Dysfunctional conflict hinders or destroys group performance and can have negative consequences. Individuals may be seeking a win-lose situation and most dysfunctional conflict is unhealthy and stems from emotional or behavioral issues. Negatives results of dysfunctional conflict include threats, verbal abuse, deception, loss and retaliation. Dysfunctional conflict can be centered around feelings and result in negative outcomes for all involved. Intrapersonal Conflict Intrapersonal conflict occurs within the individual, where the individual has two or more motives or goals to be achieved at one time. There are four types of intrapersonal conflict. First, approach-approach conflict where the individual has two desires with positive valence and equally powerful. An example of approach-approach conflict would be an individual that has two good job offers, both offers are positive. Second, with avoidance-avoidance conflict the individual has two desires with negative valence and is forced to choose one. An example is an individual with two job choices, a choice between a bad job or unemployment, both negative. Third, approach-avoidance conflict occurs when an individual is both attracted and repelled to the same goal. An example being an individual that has a job offer with a high salary and high risk, one positive and one negative outcome. Fourth, multiple-approach-avoidance conflict where an individual perceives both positive and negative valences of multiple natures. As an example, a job where there is a high salary and high security but also, long hours and a long commute. Intrapersonal conflict occurs within you and develops out of individualized thoughts, ideas and emotions. Intragroup Conflict Intragroup conflict occurs between individuals within a team. Incompatibilities and misunderstandings among these individuals lead to disagreements. Team members have different

Load more