Management Report: Conflict Management Styles within Organizations

This report provides an in-depth analysis of two primary conflict management styles: dominating and compromising. It explores the application of these styles within organizational settings, discussing their respective strengths and weaknesses. The report highlights the importance of the compromising style, especially for managers, in fostering negotiations and achieving balanced outcomes for all parties involved. Conversely, it examines the dominating style, emphasizing its potential to achieve short-term goals through aggressive tactics while potentially damaging employee morale and fostering a fearful work environment. The report contrasts these styles, drawing on research to illustrate how both can impact organizational dynamics and long-term effectiveness, concluding that while both styles offer some utility, neither is ideal for sustained positive outcomes. It emphasizes the need for a balanced approach to conflict resolution in management.

Running head: MANAGEMENT
Management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1MANAGEMENT
Introduction
The following paper will look to discuss on the various aspects of the conflict
management styles within the organizations. The conflicts are the most common factors in the
workplaces and it needs the proper handling so it can be stopped for the higher productivity level
within the organization (Hurt & Welbourne, 2018). There are various conflict management styles
that can be seen in the organizations of different cultures. In this paper, the conflict management
styles of dominating and compromising. Though these theories are quite contradictory to each
other but it has yielded better results for the understanding of the professional managers in the
workplace industries.
Positive sections
The central most important perspective for the managers is to make the decisions and
they have to be ready to take all these decisions properly. Otherwise, they cannot run their
organizations with success in the positive directions. The foremost theory that can be found in
this scenario is the context of the compromising theory (Hurt & Welbourne, 2018). The
compromising theory is definitely the most crucial fact for the managers since they have to face
many precarious situations within the workplace where they find it very difficult to be strict in all
the contexts (Tjosvold, Wong & Feng Chen, 2014).
This type of skill or theory has become very much valuable in the modern workplace
situations. This type of skill is basically very important for the owners of the small business
concerns since they have to manage various concerns and they have the task in hand to
strengthen their future properly. The deal negotiation is the most crucial fact behind this issue

2MANAGEMENT
indeed. The most difficult fact in this scenario for the managers is to know when they should
compromise and how this should compromise would work positively.
The perception of the compromise style has indeed become very much evident in all the
ways. It is because both the parties in deal would like to get the best share and the best results for
their part. In this scenario, one party must make the negotiations and comprise so the deal is not
cancelled and it is done properly. The needs are generally balanced through this method for both
the parties and all of them. Critics are of the opinion that this kind of conflict management style
will consume more time than the others.
Therefore, there is a high need that this process can be avoided but it will have to be used
in the most necessary cases (Tjosvold, Wong & Feng Chen, 2014). If this style has to be applied,
one must keep in notice that this kind of the conflict management style would definitely need
skills and capabilities of more people. Otherwise, this style cannot be implemented at all.
However, most business critics have said that this type of business conflict management style
can be more manageable and less problematic than the concept of avoidance. If one of the parties
keeps on avoiding the other, it might not lead to good results.
Negative sides
On the other hand, the comprising conflict management style will keep the partnerships
to carry on and make it more concrete in the future. People who prefer the compromising style
are very good listeners and they can solve the issues properly within a proper scenario. Both the
parties will feel the sense of victory since both their interests will be kept (Tjosvold, Wong &
Feng Chen, 2014). The act of comprising is generally believed to be a positive measure for the
business leaders to stay in the hunt for the betterment in all sorts. This is kind of maturity and

3MANAGEMENT
this may be indicated as the sign of being a proper team member for the overall development of
the team (Saeed et al., 2014).
Discipline context
The second theory for the conflict management style is dominating. This is another tool
for the managers to stay ahead of their competitors in the competitive business environment. It
should be ensured in this scenario that the dominating management style is the most crucial
perspective for the managers to be aggressive and reach their objectives through the proper
organizational design. The managers will show a bit of aggression so they can make sure that the
goals of the organization are met properly.
The employees will be under pressure to complete their tasks but they will definitely not
be able to do it properly and enthusiastically because they are already in fear. In other words, this
kind of leadership or conflict management style will never come up to be the most effective style
since the fellow feeling and amicable relationships between the managers and subordinates will
completely be ruined in this case. This is why the employees might be compelled to leave the
organization (Zhang, Chen & Sun, 2015). Later on, this will increase the turnover rate of the
organization. At a certain extent, it will effective to reach their goals but it will never be
appropriate to forcibly complete the jobs in a fearful working environment.
Compare/ Contrast with other articles
Otherwise, it would not be possible for them to reach their goals within a certain time
frame. This method will be a applied by a person when he has reached the powerful position in
the organization and look to fulfill his aim by implementing some straightforward strategies
(Saeed et al., 2014). He will pressurize the employees to make sure that objectives are fulfilled.

4MANAGEMENT
This kind of dominating approach in mitigating the conflicts has both its positive and negative
sides. The powerful manager might be able to reach his goals in a short term period through
creating the sense of fear and aggression as the mode of motivation for the employees.
Conclusion
In the concluding section of the paper, it must be said that both these conflict
management styles have been regarded as effective to some extent but these styles are not at all
good for the long term procedure. It will damage the morale of the employees and might lead
them to take help of the unethical means to complete their works within a short span of time. The
works must be completed but not by dominating the employees and creating the fearful
environment. This will cost the innovative techniques of the employees completely. The
comprising theory will also be problematic after an extent of period.

5MANAGEMENT
References
Hurt, K. J., & Welbourne, J. (2018). Conflict and Decision‐Making: Attributional and Emotional
Influences. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 11(3), 225-251.
Saeed, T., Almas, S., Anis-ul-Haq, M., & Niazi, G. S. K. (2014). Leadership styles: relationship
with conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management.
Tjosvold, D., Wong, A. S., & Feng Chen, N. Y. (2014). Constructively managing conflicts in
organizations. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav., 1(1), 545-568.
Zhang, S. J., Chen, Y. Q., & Sun, H. (2015). Emotional intelligence, conflict management styles,
and innovation performance. International Journal of Conflict Management.