Choosing Your Battles

        All in all, there is a variety of ways that people can achieve positive, agreeable relationships without conflict, but sometimes this can cause a situation as well. It could pose a problem if there is a lack of conflict in certain situations. For instance, when working in a team environment, disagreements and disputes early on in the process may be ideal in order to form the best possible solution to the situation at hand. Initially posing arguments can be beneficial when devising a specific plan while seeking an advance in the situation. Bringing up difference from the start can lead to positive improvements whilst in problem-solving teams.

        The circumstances must be absolutely correct for conflict to arise in order to be helpful. More specifically, people must feel secure when bringing up problem situations to be spoken about in team environments. If an individual is unsure whether or not the group will turn against them according to their own thoughts, they may be wary to voice their opinion. Although their belief may be useful, people are guarded in order to not stir up any controversy within a team. Experts believe that valuable disputes must speak to what is possible, be compelling, and involve uncertainty (MY BOOK, YEAR, p. #).

        There are multiple ways that a manager can warrant a conflict in order to pursue a solution within a team. They definitely need to make sure that risking such differences will work out positively. Next they should be certain that their expectations are valid to engage in a conflict so as an individual is not singled out. Managers need to ensure that enduring a conflict will in turn produce essential principals for their outcome. The managers should never appoint winners or losers in said arguments, but be sure that all parties involved realize how positive and beneficial a conflict can be to reach the most advantageous results on the whole. If managers execute conflicts effectively it can be helpful to extinguish any looming unconstructive arguments in the future.

        The biggest question of all is whether or not these ideas actually work in real life and the answer is undoubtedly so. At Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad, altering its past ways of scheduling and logistics formulated many differences among the organization (MY BOOK, YEAR, p. #). In turn, these changes that were created through conflict assisted the company to create an aggressive position in the transportation industry (MY BOOK, YEAR, p. #) and forced the railroad to improve its current system to a more advanced structure. In a separate organization, the CEO of Campbell Soup did not concentrate on sides among the organization, but instead posed conflicts to enhance persistence in coming to conclusions that helped change. Businesses face situations bearing conflicts often and how managers control these problems is key to a successful organization. Often enough, companies take dysfunctional conflicts in the workplace and urge team members to produce positivity from their differences. Consecutively, companies can boost employee morale and performance to assist the organization in becoming successful.

To explain my own thoughts after reading this case study, I believe that conflict is a positive aspect in an organization if handled correctly, but can understand the worry among employees in voicing their concerns. More often than not, employees fear voicing their opinion so as to not “rock the boat” and be blamed for any inefficiencies down the road. This brings us back to the Abilene Paradox where an individual among the group may be hesitant to voice their opinion since the rest of the individuals seem to be agreeing on the same point. Each organization if very complex and depending on the industry needs to be treated differently in order to produce positive results in the end.