Handling Conflicts In The Workplace Essay

Case Study #2 – Handling Conflicts in the Workplace
Eghosa Idumwonyi
HCMG750 Financial Mgt. for Health Care
Prof. Candy Johnson
October 5, 2015

Introduction
Conflicts in the workplace are one of the most challenging managerial tasks because of the differences in people’s morals and principles (Mayhew, 2013). It’s a double-edged sword because managers needed to use his person skills to gain the confidence of his subordinates and at the same time, be firm and bold in upholding company policies (Mayhew, 2013). An effective manager handles potential issues with a precautionary approach, keeping in mind that conflicts may arise due to diversity of opinion, values, and individual backgrounds (Mayhew, 2013).

Summary of the Case
In the case study presented, Steven may be well regarded as the “whistleblower” depending whether the information he is willing to provide his manager is valid and valuable to the issues the company is facing (Ethics Resource Center, 2014). Ideally, the immediate supervisor or the manager should personally handle whistle blower statements (Ethics Resource Center, 2014).
Nevertheless, according to Ethics Resource Center of 2014, most employees prefer to divulge sensitive information through a company hotline due to concerns of confidentiality and anonymity (Ethics Resource Center, 2014). Unfortunately even then, about 15 percent of workers who reported misconduct in the workplace get a cold shoulder or unfair treatment either by their boss or other employees (Ethics Resource Center, 2014).
Worse, some whistleblowers were excluded to certain activities or decision-making process. Despite these scenarios, a significant number of employees who observe wrongdoings in the workplace would still choose to report them to higher authorities (Ethics Resource Center, 2014).
Relevant Facts
Steven’s concern is that there is a pre-existing issue of favored employees, who usually get positive responses from the management on the basis that they know each other. For Steven, it is a clear hindrance for employee growth since workers are assessed not based on the hard work that they do but rather on influence and personal connections.
When he reported the incident to the newly appointed manager, Wendy, he was surprised that her tone and approach wasn’t exactly as he expected it to be. Wendy was confrontational, not to mention that she threatened to fire Steven if he is not able to disclose the full details.
Ethical Issues
Because Wendy is newly assigned to the division, the burden comes with her knowing the current condition of the workplace, attitudes and values of the employees, and existing and pre-existing conflicts. Just like in any other conflict management cases, her investigation would take some time primarily due to lack of hindsight and prior knowledge.
She may have to interview rank-and-file people, team leaders, and supervisors before making sense of Steven’s report. Upon the conclusion of preliminary interviews, Wendy has to decide whether or not there was a misconduct based on the company’s definition and that of the labor law. There is always a need to seek external advice from legal experts for the sake of balance and objectivity.
Alternative Actions
As with Steven, he was made to believe that his manager, Wendy, can swiftly handle his confession but it turned out otherwise. Naturally, Wendy would try to win the confidence of her colleagues by telling them that her office is always available to hear and address employee concerns.
Unfortunately for Steven, his confession is quite disruptive of Wendy’s intention to build harmonious relationships with her subordinates. Here, there is a slight possibility that Wendy might try to sweep the dirt under the rug especially if the information Steven will provide is conflicting with her interests. Since the manager responded in a surprising and inappropriate manner, it is now up to Steven on how to best communicate the situation.
Ethical Issues to Alternative Actions
Assuming that Steven will provide the manager the full details of his concern, Wendy shall have no other choice but to name Steven as the complainant.

Otherwise, transparency will be in question. However, if Steven chooses not to disclose the entire facts of his case or downplay its negative impact and chooses to resolve it himself with the help of the human resources department, he is not necessarily helping the organization recover from the turmoil.
Nevertheless, Steven’s integrity and credibility will always be in question until the case is resolved. He also has to endure possible differences in his working relationships with other colleagues.
Practical Restraints
One of the practical restraints possible to happen is that the company will have to allocate human resources, time, and money for legal assistance in order to complete the investigation. Time that is supposed to be spent on development of other projects will be used to interview key people and eyewitnesses. In the same manner, Steven and other employees will have to temporarily halt their tasks to attend to closed-door meetings.
Recommended Actions
According to Department of Education & Training (2015), resolving a complaint process must include the following information: the name of the complainant, the date and time of the alleged conduct, the location where the alleged conduct occurred, witnesses or other parties involved, and any other relevant

details.
Assuming Steven is able to provide the necessary information, Wendy must consider the following factors in managing the conflict – fairness to all, confidentiality, public sector values, employee rights, witnesses, defamation, protection from victimization, whistleblower protection, vexatious complaints, documentation, removal from duty, and conflict of interest.

Conclusion
Strong ethics start at the top of the hierarchy. There is always the bigger challenge for the management to maintain integrity and credibility in investigating and resolving conflicts because the result is reactionary to future cases. “A culture that promotes ethics in the workplace can have a positive effect on employee morale (Lighthouse, 2010).” It allows people to have the courage to do what is right and feel good about their decisions.