Executive Summary
Practices for dispute management in governmental organizations in the UAE present the key topic covered in the given report. Being devoted to the principles of conflict management and DSD, the paper adds to the existing knowledge on the topic by analyzing the situation at the chosen organization and reflecting on improvement opportunities. The report is focused on the Department of Economic Development in Dubai and internal conflicts related to workforce diversity and work practices that some employees find useless or counterproductive.
As is shown in the analysis, the currently used dispute resolution system is not extremely effective since some employees are not motivated to report conflicts and find solutions. Instead, connivance or emotional detachment can be demonstrated. Based on the discussion of commonly used DSD practices and improvement options, a set of recommendations concerning dispute management (specialized teams, education, and conflict analysis) is proposed.
Introduction
The principles of conflict management can be listed among the key tools helping to make work more productive and encourage employees to focus on their responsibilities instead of emphasizing their individual needs and interpersonal differences at work. The importance of conflict management principles in commercial organizations is a popular topic in business research. However, the methods of conflict management and prevention in governmental organizations in the UAE can be regarded as a research gap.
Company Description
The organization chosen for the report belongs to the key departments of the UAE Government. The Department of Economic Development located in Dubai is a public sector company that is responsible for setting the given emirate’s plans for economic growth and transforming its economy (Dubai DED, n.d.a). Being a governmental organization, the Department of Economic Development has to perform a wide range of tasks. These tasks are aimed at promoting economic growth and preventing the negative impact of external factors such as illegal trade on the region’s financial situation. In its statement of strategic directions, the organization highlights that its employees use the most recent technological advancements to achieve the above goals and make Dubai economically competitive (Dubai DED, n.d.a.). Thus, it communicates with businesses, individual customers, or the UAE society through a variety of ways, including social media.
Numerous awards received by the organization in the past are indicative of its proper strategy and the ability to build strong partnership relations. For instance, six years ago, it was listed among the distinguished public entities in the UAE (Lasrado, 2017). In its turn, the Department of Economic Development is also involved in giving business quality awards to non-governmental organizations in the country (Lasrado, 2017). The prizes are awarded based on a variety of factors such as HR strategies. With that in mind, the discussed organization is expected to demonstrate excellence and high employee satisfaction levels. Despite that, conflicts between its employees still exist, and their causes are discussed in the paper.
Conflict Principles and Theory
Conflicts at the workplace can be classified in different ways since the opinions on the most common sources of disputes vary. As is clear from the works of modern researchers, arguments that occur at the workplace are classified concerning the distribution of power and the key properties of the conflicting parties (Al-Jenaibi, 2014). For instance, the theory proposed by Janjua in 2002 analyzes conflicts at work from the perspective of organizational structure (Al-Jenaibi, 2014). According to the aforementioned approach, they exist between individuals, an individual and an entire group, and two or more groups (Al-Jenaibi, 2014). Taking into account the presence of rigid hierarchical structures in strongly patriarchal societies, many workplace arguments occur due to employees’ dissatisfaction with the model of power distribution and its practical consequences (Kim et al., 2017). Considering that different types of disputes are usually associated with dissimilar situations, the stages of conflict analysis and classification are among the key steps in the process of dispute resolution.
The Department of Economic Development employs a great number of specialists in economics and finance. Along with other public sector employees in the UAE, people working at the organization being discussed believe that different forms of workforce diversity present the key factors contributing to interpersonal conflicts at work (Al-Jenaibi, 2014). Among the particular types of workplace disputes, there are arguments between individuals based on gender and cultural differences. In particular, some female Muslim employees may find it extremely uncomfortable to work together with male colleagues or customers, especially foreigners (Al-Jenaibi, 2014). Personality differences and political preferences, Al-Jenaibi (2014) states, also belong to the key sources of problems in the UAE public sector. Therefore, as is can be seen from these findings, conflicts between employees of the chosen organization occur due to many reasons, ranging from different life philosophies to cultural norms.
Current Scenario of Conflict Addressing
Despite the reliability of the research findings discussed above, the current employees from the Department of Economic Development may want to avoid discussing more specific causes of workplace arguments. Possibly, it can be related to the relationships with managers or unethical behavior demonstrated by the latter. First of all, any employees are not interested in bringing out internal conflicts as it can pose a threat to their position and reputation in the discussed organization (Fox & Cowan, 2015). With that in mind, the opinions of former employees can help analyze the situation. According to some of them, their experience of workplace disputes was primarily related to the distribution of responsibilities, the challenges of multitasking, and the inability to take lunch breaks when necessary (“Department of Economic Development employee reviews,” n.d.). These reviews indicate that apart from having arguments with equal co-workers based on personal differences, many specialists from the Department of Economic Development are displeased with some working practices accepted by the management.
Internal conflicts, especially those related to people on different organizational levels, are not always reported properly in both public and private sectors. Unfortunately, the Department of Economic Development in Dubai cannot be called an exception since many former and present employees voice their complaints without consulting managers or conflict resolution specialists (“Department of Economic Development employee reviews,” n.d.). These contemplations do not contradict the actual research findings related to dispute resolution systems in the UAE public sector. Specialists working for the Department of Economic Development and other governmental structures in the country acknowledge that in many cases, people involved in arguments prefer to “detach themselves from the situation” instead of asking a disinterested party to help (Al-Jenaibi, 2014, p. 174). Therefore, they choose the avoidant style of behavior, which makes the department’s conflict resolution system less effective (Raines, 2013; Dignath, Kiesel, & Eder, 2015). Considering the peculiarities of dispute resolution listed above, the company’s main task is to make employees more open when it comes to conflicts. Also, changing the current system is required to eliminate any cases of workplace bullying that make people afraid of informing the upper management about disputes.
The situation with dispute resolution in the chosen company is not perfect since the management is not aware of all conflicts that occur at different organizational levels. In general, workplace disputes in different companies can be underreported due to the lack of special organizational mechanisms aimed at argument prevention, the misuse of authority causing employees’ conflict-avoidant behavior, or the perceived ineffectiveness of complaint channels (Kim & Krishna, 2017). To reduce the impact of these issues on the discussed company’s effective work, all threats should be addressed with the help of a well-organized dispute system.
Proposal of a Dispute System
It has been shown in the previous sections that many conflicts in the Department of Economic Development do not come to the attention of managers. Instead of voicing their concerns directly, some employees prefer to discuss them with colleagues, which is extremely counterproductive in terms of dispute resolution. With that in mind, the proposed dispute system is aimed at solving the following tasks:
- Reduce fears related to the consequences of open discussions;
- Promote organizational justice (Rupp, Wright, Aryee, & Luo, 2015);
- Find the right balance between the interests of employees, managers, and clients.
The dispute system recommended to the Department of Economic Development is based on the principle of integrative bargaining. To be put in other words, the interdependence of the conflicting parties is emphasized, and potential solutions are evaluated based on the presence of mutual benefits (Li, Yin, Chong, & Shi, 2018). Significant cases can be divided into groups or analyzed separately depending on their character (illegal actions, cultural clashes, reactions to organizational practices, etc.).
Within the frame of the system, a range of important changes helping to address the aforementioned problems is proposed. First, the company’s external conflict resolution system is people-oriented since the department has nine channels to help it deal with clients’ complaints (Dubai DED, n.d.b). It is impossible to achieve success if employees are unequal in terms of access to such resources. Therefore, the creation of a dispute resolution team with representatives on different organizational levels is highly recommended.
The team will communicate with managers and employees through various channels. Such channels include face-to-face meetings, phone calls, social media, and e-mail to collect information about systematic workplace disputes affecting the company’s organizational health and provide conflict counseling services if necessary (Omeje, 2015). All cases will be systematically organized for future research, and the team will analyze complaints with special attention to such documents as the code of ethics and internal policies to define their root causes. Based on the team’s conclusions, some situations will be regulated through internal discussions, negotiations, or recommendations to the parties, whereas some will require a policy change or even the intervention of law enforcement authorities.
Costs and Benefits of Dispute Settlement Systems
The creation of a proper dispute system in any organization involves a large amount of preparatory work that can be quite costly, but its positive outcomes usually outweigh such disadvantages. Among the costs of dispute systems at large organizations, there are financial expenses associated with research, statistical analysis, risk assessment, improvement monitoring, and the creation of new work positions (Costantino & Lewis, 2015). In the case being discussed, all these issues will be present, and the use of cost planning tools will be required.
The positive outcomes of process systematization are numerous and relate to all aspects of working processes. By using standardized dispute resolution algorithms and the help of new specialists acting as a neutral party, the company being analyzed will improve the perceptions of organizational justice, promote equality, and define practices to be changed. More than that, the decision to negotiate rather than taking unnecessary legal steps is financially viable.
Industry Best Practices
Engaging in dispute systems design (DSD) requires a vast amount of work and is sometimes extremely difficult for public or private organizations. Businesses may vary in terms of key values, and to some extent, a lack of proper balance between authority and rights presents a barrier to the creation of effective dispute systems. Changing a company’s hierarchy of values to place emphasis on people’s common interests and reduce the impact of power and inequality is among the key practices used in DSD (Raines, 2013). The basic principles of DSD that are still actively used were formulated in the 1980s by Ury and his colleagues. They managed to resolve internal conflicts related to a series of coal miners’ strikes (Liu, Inlow, & Feng, 2014). The method involved enabling employees at the lowest levels to engage in negotiations to provide win-win solutions, creating effective feedback, and providing employee education opportunities (Liu et al., 2014). As is clear from the experience of pioneers in DSD, the implementation of new dispute systems should be preceded by thorough planning and well-organized work with employees.
It is common knowledge that the peculiarities of modern dispute systems may vary depending on the types of organizations and the number of resources. Despite such differences, there is a common practice used by companies all over the world for the creation of effective systems for dispute resolution. Thus, even large companies that have access to significant financial and human resources are recommended to arrange process options based on the associated costs (from the lowest to the highest) (Raines, 2013). From stability considerations, it is necessary to try low-cost or interest-based options first instead of engaging in legal disputes.
Another important practice that can be used in public organizations refers to the stages of DSD processes. In their theory dated 1996, Merchant and Costantino propose a 4-stage model of DSD that is currently used in many industries (Raines, 2013). The first stage, the so-called organizational diagnosis, involves conducting needs assessments and analyzing the currently used dispute system and its drawbacks (Raines, 2013). During the next two stages, the work related to system design and implementation is performed. In the end, the perceived and actual effectiveness of new systems (in terms of costs and other factors) is evaluated, and, based on the results, a final decision concerning its universal implementation is made (Raines, 2013). Due to this model, DSD processes become logical and well-organized.
Conclusion
In the end, the Department of Economic Development has a range of opportunities to improve its current dispute system. Among the options that can be proposed, there is the creation of special teams responsible for counseling and conflict analysis, the introduction of effective complaint channels for employees, and focusing on win-win solutions. Being based on common DSD principles, the recommendations are expected to propel the organization’s approach to dispute management to the next level.
References
Al-Jenaibi, B. (2014). Managing conflict in workplace: A case study in the UAE Organizations. In Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos (Ed.), International business strategy and entrepreneurship: An information technology perspective (pp. 165-184). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Costantino, C. A., & Lewis, M. R. (2015). What dispute systems design can learn from project management. Negotiation Journal, 31(3), 175-210.
Department of Economic Development employee reviews. (n.d.). Web.
Dignath, D., Kiesel, A., & Eder, A. B. (2015). Flexible conflict management: Conflict avoidance and conflict adjustment in reactive cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(4), 975-988.
Dubai DED. (n.d.a). About DED. Web.
Dubai DED. (n.d.b). Complaint channels. Web.
Fox, S., & Cowan, R. L. (2015). Revision of the workplace bullying checklist: The importance of human resource management’s role in defining and addressing workplace bullying. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), 116-130.
Kim, S., Bochatay, N., Relyea-Chew, A., Buttrick, E., Amdahl, C., Kim, L.,… Lee, Y. M. (2017). Individual, interpersonal, and organisational factors of healthcare conflict: A scoping review. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 31(3), 282-290.
Kim, S., & Krishna, A. (2017). Bridging strategy versus buffering strategy: Enhancing crisis management capability in public management for relational and reputational improvement, and conflict avoidance. Asian Journal of Communication, 27(5), 517-535.
Lasrado, F. (2017). Perceived benefits of national quality awards: A study of UAE’s award winning organizations. Measuring Business Excellence, 21(1), 50-64.
Li, Q., Yin, Z., Chong, H. Y., & Shi, Q. (2018). Nexus of interorganizational trust, principled negotiation, and joint action for improved cost performance: Survey of Chinese megaprojects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 34(6), 04018036. Web.
Liu, L. A., Inlow, L., & Feng, J. B. (2014). Institutionalizing sustainable conflict management in organizations: Leaders, networks, and sensemaking. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 32(2), 155-176.
Omeje, K. (2015). Promoting peace and conflict-sensitive higher education in Sub-Saharan Africa. African Conflict and Peace Building Review, 5(2), 33-56.
Raines, S. S. (2013). Conflict management for managers: Resolving workplace, client, and policy disputes. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Rupp, D. E., Wright, P. M., Aryee, S., & Luo, Y. (2015). Organizational justice, behavioral ethics, and corporate social responsibility: Finally the three shall merge. Management and Organization Review, 11(1), 15-24.