Interpersonal and Group Dynamics


In workplace, there are always interactions between workers and conflicts among workers. People all think differently and express their thoughts and feelings in various ways, which may cause conflict with each other. And, it is important for manager to be able to keep good relationship among workers and resolve conflicts smoothly if it happens since “individual and organizational effectiveness depend heavily on the quality of interpersonal relationships and team dynamics” according to B&D chapter 8. Here is one example of conflict that I have experienced in RSO.

In the RSO, there were 5 different teams. Our team had to hold an annual event on Champaign public library as usual. It was our team’s event where we introduce Korean cultures to children and their parents. For example, we would have various activities that children can participate; Korean traditional game called Tu-ho (pitch-pot), wearing Korean traditional clothes, and making key chain with Korean traditional pattern. We rent one of the biggest group rooms and have each booth of various activities in the room. Our RSO executive board expects for members to support other teams’ events. So, our team and team leader originally hoped to get some help from other teams, asking them to come to our events and help with different booths if they have some time. So, there were poll for members on each team’s group chat to pick going/not going to get estimation of how many members will be at the event so our team can have well-organized event with their help. The poll count was extremely high, and we weren’t expecting that many people to come to our event since there will be children and their parents which will be already crowded in the group room. So, our team leader politely told to executive board that it would be really great to have all the members but we don’t need that much people at our events since it will be too crowded and distracting children. And, each team leader in the executive group chat delivered the message to their members. Later, we found out that some members were offended and didn’t feel comfortable with the message.

The message was unintentionally delivered by two team leaders as “You shouldn’t come because it is distracting for the team to have an organized event.” In the members’ who got the message with negative tone perspective, they would be offended since they were willing to invest their own time to help our team’s event, yet we denied their support and ignore their caring attitude towards us. If I were the one who heard that message when I was encouraged to help other teams by executive board and was willing to help the other team, I would also be offended and think our team’s attitude to be disrespectful. The conflict happened because the two of the team leaders delivered our message wrong.

In addition, we later found out that the members were stressed to come to our event by executive board. They thought that they had to come to the event if they don’t have any excuses when it isn’t really required event for members to come. That was the reason why the poll count was extremely high.  

In this case, the communication among executive board wasn’t going well and members complained and talked about it behind the scene. And, this conflict wasn’t solved in public matter, our team leader just explained to executive board that it wasn’t our intention to force people to come support our events and wasn’t saying that don’t come to our event since it is distracting. So, there were still many people unsatisfied with the incident that happened.

In the B&D chapter, there were two models of solving the conflict. In the first model, one assumes that the conflict is caused due to the other side, meaning avoiding the personal responsibility and blaming others. And, when it comes to solving, one tries to solve it privately and tries to change the person, which can be extremely hard. In the second model, one emphasizes the common goal of the group, instead of blaming certain person in the group. And, one tries to resolve the conflict openly and combines advocacy and inquiry. Model 2 requires some effort to understand others’ feeling and thoughts and discuss in public, confronting the conflict.

From my experience, the model 1 explains the situation. The conflict wasn’t fully resolved, and there were still members that are not fully understand how this happened. The origin source of the conflict is the lack of communication and pressure under members to present in other team’s events. However, the executive board blamed each other for not fully explaining and misunderstanding. And, they didn’t discuss about the pressure and complains that members had regarding attending other teams’ events. In addition, members that are not in executive board didn’t directly hear what happened, yet they just heard from other people, which can cause more misunderstanding and further conflicts.

If I were in the middle of the conflict and the one who is responsible for resolving the conflict, I would rather talk in public as model 2 explains. Even though it can be hard to discuss the conflict openly, it causes less misunderstanding and spreading rumors. I would emphasize that our common goal, promoting Korean cultures, and helping other teams’ events is one way to do so. I will also clarify that since it is RSO, members don’t need to be under pressure to support it and members won’t get penalized prioritizing their course work. In order to prevent this conflict, I would communicate more often with other members or in executive board and try to communicate in person. Overall, I believe that conflicts can definitely occur in group since people have different perspectives and ways to express themselves. Resolving conflicts can be overwhelming but once it is resolved, individuals in the group can understand each other better and have better performances with bonding.

Comments

  1. Professor ArvanNovember 16, 2019 at 7:40 AM

    I believe you are confounding a single episode where a bad mistake was made - the sending of a message that was poorly written so misinterpreted - from a conflict, where this is ongoing tension. So, to consider the situation differently you need to talk about the relationship between your team and the other teams, before the message was sent, and then again after this issue was over. Likewise, you need to consider the relationship between your team and the Executive Board in the same manner. If the episode had enduring effects then that may have been the start of a conflict. If it did not, then it was a bad mistake, but one from which everyone recovered.

    So, a different but related issue is whether Model 2 can be used in more ways than you indicated in your last paragraph. Had your team leaders reread the message, would they have agreed that it was offensive to members of other teams? Had your team leaders thought to share the message with the rest of your team before sending it out? Were your team leaders aware of the message from the Executive Board before sending out this message?

    As a general matter in writing, a skill that needs to be developed is to put yourself in the position of the reader, if you can. The original composition of the piece might reflect your own view. But then a proofreading of the piece and subsequent editing should happen with the reader more in mind. In order to do this well, it is probably necessary for the editing to happen with a time lag from when the first draft of the piece was completed. That way you can come at the writing with a fresh view and not be so locked into your previous thinking. Doing this well takes practice, quite a lot actually. And some of that practice needs to be as a reader of other people's writing. So you develop your own view as a reader.

    Errors in communication can come without intent, if the sender lacks the necessary skill. Forgiveness should be given if there was no intent to offend. But then everyone needs to ask, how can we improve so this type of thing doesn't happen again? In an effective organization, the members learn from their mistakes. Otherwise, the organization can fracture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lawrence Klein Econ 490 fall 2019November 19, 2019 at 7:20 AM

      Before the message was sent, there was no tension between teams. After the tension, members kind of see how many of the other team members had come to their own team's event. I believe that episode was the start of knowing the actual conflict, with members started to openly complain about how they get stressed and pressure to participate in other team's events. Since it was almost at the end of the semester, and our event was the individual team's last event, I think the conflict didn't get bigger. But, for the betterment of the RSO, I believe the executive board and members should smoothly resolve the conflict for the next semester and so on. In addition, I would like to add the fact that team leaders in executive board have lots of personal conflict between them this semester, meaning there is some probability that each member can personally take the message with negative aspect.

      After the error in communication had found, our team leader and our team reread the message that our team leader sent to the executive board, and we do not see any confusions or negative tone on the message, which can be heard offensive to others. Before the team leader sent out the message, out team discussed how we should tell other members that we appreciate your support but in order to have well-organized event in public space, we should unfortunately reduce the support, meaning that our team members were aware of the message from the executive board. We thought that we don't have to write the message together since we have discusses enough.

      I also believe that members can learn from their mistakes. But, in this case, I think the tension and conflict among executive board members and stress that members get from executive board mainly affect the errors in communication, showing the problem in misunderstanding of one message. I think I should have included the information of how executive board members alert each other and are in somewhat competition among them to have a successful and supporting team. They want to stress their members to support other teams and at the same time they want the most successful team event to be theirs. As result, members want to support their team leader, they are under pressure to support other teams even though they had complaints inside. I think that all those hidden conflicts and complaints were finally shown through this incident.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Connecting the dots

Reading through my prior posts, I have written blog posts about transaction costs, opportunism, successful team, and transfer pricing. Blogging helps me to understand the concept much better than other classes that I am just listening to the lectures and taking tests on the concepts that I was taught. Blogging helps us to think about real-world situation and our own experiences regarding the concept and elaborate how that experiences are connected to the concept/theme of the blog and further in our course. And, I believe that applying concept to the real-world is the most important in the learning process, since it is actual purpose of the learning. I realized that I can connect the dots among the blog posts, and also the concepts that we have learned in the class. In general way of connecting dots among blog posts, transaction costs occur when one tries to make the organization better. And, in order to have the better performing organization, one would need to have a successful ...
Read more

Opportunism

Opportunism is “taking advantage of circumstances”. With the definition of opportunism, one would think that “wise” people would act opportunistically since it is an additional benefit for them. However, there are some people who don’t act opportunistically because they would want to be a “good citizen” or their opportunistic action is considered unethical. In class, we discussed an example of being a “good citizen.” Good citizens (students) would help students who are enrolled later in the course to figure out what is going on in the class since they have been in class from the beginning, and they know what is going on in the class. That action is not required but as a good citizen, students would help others to get caught up in the class. Also, voting is an example of good citizen’s behavior. Voting for presidential election isn’t required but good citizen would vote and express one’s thought for the better society. Taking advantage can be considered unethical in a sense of...
Read more

Successful Team

According to Bolman and Deal in “Reframing Organization”, there are several team configurations: One Boss, Dual Authority, Simple Hierarchy, Circle Network, and All-Channel Network. Each team configuration has benefits and weakness. The top authority of organization would choose one configuration that would work best for them, since team configuration has a great impact on team's success and each members' authorities and responsibilities.  It is quite sad for me to say that I do not have been part of a successful team in my college experience. It might because I haven’t worked or interned in some companies which are usually highly structured organizations. When I took ECON 460 (Financial Economics) at U of I, I had to work with four other students who are taking the course for group project. We had to analyze the payout policies for the certain firm, recommend a better payout policies, and present it to classmates and the professor. Our team configuration is All-Channel Ne...
Read more