Was Firing Him Too Drastic, Essay Example

Abstract

The paper evaluates and discusses a business case study. The main conflict management styles and their appropriateness are discussed. The paper mentions the concept of integrative negotiations and refers to communication issues in business. A set of recommendations is provided.

Introduction

Effective business communication and the appropriate choice of conflict management styles lay the foundation for achieving mutual agreement in organizations and using to pursue the main organization’s objectives. Unfortunately, not always do company owners realize the value of integrative negotiations and are overtly reluctant to reconsider the situation through the prism of their opponents’ eyes. The case of Kalinsky and his decision to fire his brother-in-law shows how inappropriate communication decisions may throw the whole company along with its business achievements into an abyss. Kalinsky did not have to fire his former brother-in-law simply because the problem was not in Dave, but in Kalinsky’s inability to adopt the principles of effective conflict management.

Was Firing Him Too Drastic? – Factors of Firing

In case of Kalinsky and his former brother-in-law, several essential aspects of firing become obvious. First of all, the close family ties which for Kalinsky were gradually becoming a burden to him. Second, Kalinsky faced the threat of losing his major client, Capital One, and his former brother-in-law could not resolve those business issues effectively. Third, although Kalinsky realized the contribution which his father-in-law had made and how he supported his enterprise in difficult times, he could not find a common language with the younger Kenworthy. Fourth, the fact that his partner Dave criticized his decisions behind his back and wanted a bigger share of profits did not give Kalinsky any chance to take a different decision. Unfortunately, Kalinsky’s business failure was primarily caused by his being unable to develop effective conflict management approaches and to maintain productive communication between different business parties.

Conflict Management Style

Effective (functional) conflict management implies the parties’ ability to match the conflict management styles, which they choose, to the situation in need for resolution (Rahim, 2001). However, only when the major criteria of conflict management are satisfied, can such matching be effective. That Kalinsky could not choose conflict management styles appropriately largely predetermined his failure to develop and maintain effective communication ties with Dave. It would be fair to say that the conflict management style which Kalinsky adopted in his business performance was mostly avoiding – Kalinsky was not willing to discuss the communication issues and business problems with Dave directly, nor was his willing to take the decision-making power over Capital One in his hands. Needless to say, that “avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative – the individual does not immediately pursue his own concerns or those of the other person” (Parker & Stone, 2002). No, that does not mean that avoiding conflict management style does not work; rather, the number of the conflict situations which make avoiding style appropriate is very limited. According to Rahim (2001), avoiding conflict management style may produce positive results when the issue is trivial, when the effects of confronting the other party overweigh the benefits of conflict resolution, or when the parties need some time to cool off. However, for Kalinsky, the issue was, on the one hand, extremely important and, on the other hand, he was the one responsible for taking the most appropriate decision – the two conditions which make avoiding style increasingly ineffective. This ineffectiveness of conflict management was further supplemented by the lack of integrative negotiation awareness between the parties.

Aspects of Integrative Negotiation

Negotiation is generally referred to as a form of interpersonal interaction, during which decisions are being taken, and which also involves the need for the participants to interpret available information and to undertake actions necessary to achieve their objectives (Moran & Ritov, 2007). Integrative negotiation is associated with the need for the parties to create a win-win situation, to reconcile the interests of both parties and to increase the level of joint benefit (Bazerman & Neale, 1992). Relationship, experience, and the need to take into account other parties’ priorities are fairly regarded as three most critical aspects of integrative negotiation, and while the relationships between Kalinsky and his former brother-in-law were extremely complex, and Kalinsky obviously did not have much negotiation experience, the most problematic aspects of his decision-making was his inability to take into account Dave’s priorities, interests, and possible reasons that stood behind Dave’s criticism. Certainly, perspective taking alone cannot guarantee the success of integrative approaches to business negotiation and conflict resolution; Kalinsky often did not possess information necessary to make these negotiations effective, but the avoiding style which Kalinsky adopted did not leave him an opportunity to look deeper into the meaning of his business situation. He could not access the information he might have needed to evaluate his business position and the role of his former brother-in-law in undermining the stability of their business performance.

Three Communication Issues

Distance, the lack of respect, and the focus on dramatically different objectives are the three most important communication issues, which Kalinsky faced but did not want to recognize. In this information vacuum and the lack of continuous communication contact also led to the situation, in which Kalinsky would not be able to predict Dave’s actions or to evaluate their business consistency. In simple terms, Kalinsky simply gave up his major client to Dave, while he was primarily responsible for tracing the development of business relationships with that client. In light of everything said above, firing Kalinsky was really a dramatic and highly misbalanced decision, which confirmed Kalinsky as the person unable to resolve conflicts effectively and eager to sacrifice the whole business for the sake of unknown and mostly unclear priorities and objectives.

Recommendations

For Kalinsky to succeed in his future business endeavors, he should realize that effective conflict resolution is impossible without (a) learning; (b) taking into account stakeholder needs; and (c) being ethical (Rahim, 2001). Moreover, Kalinsky should understand that conflict management is not about one best approach – adopting the principles of one and the same conflict management style will never help him resolve his communication issues. Rather, in the current state of organization studies, contingency approach to conflict is considered one of the most innovative forms of resolving conflicts (Rahim, 2001). Depending on the quality of decision and its acceptance, the leader is expected to choose the style most appropriate to address these two decision-making variables. Without this flexibility, further complemented with ethical behaviors, mutual respect, and integrative conflict visions, Kalinsky will hardly be able to promote his business image and create effective business ties with clients and partners.

Conclusion

Effective conflict management is the key to sustainable business success. Unfortunately, very often to fire someone is easier than to approach the problem and to resolve it. Firing Kalinsky’s former brother-in-law was the indication of Kalinsky’s inability to manage conflicts effectively. He chose avoidance and preferred losing effective business ties and his company to developing a constructive vision of the issue. Without understanding the principles of conflict management, being ethical and promoting respect, Kalinsky will hardly be able to build effective business ties with his future clients and partners.

References

Bazerman, M.H. & Neale, M.A. (1992). Negotiating rationally. New York: The Free Press.

Moran, S. & Ritov, I. (2007). Experience in integrative negotiations: What needs to be learned? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43: 77-90.

Parker, C. & Stone, B. (2002). Developing management skills for leadership. Pearson Education.

Rahim, M.A. (2001). Managing conflict in organizations. Greenwood Publishing Group.