**7. Concluding remarks**

The five-step model I have presented in this chapter can be understood as a resource in managers' conflict resolution practices, to be used individually or in dialog with discussion partners, like other managers in management teams. It is a tool for analyzing conflicts to gain a deeper and more systematic understanding of the situation in question so that it becomes clearer how it can be resolved step by step. The model can be used to understand complex conflicts between employees, or between employees and managers, so that the initial understanding of a conflict is transformed into knowledge of the underlying deep structure. The model can also be used in debriefing after a conflict, to understand why the conflict escalated, so that managers are better prepared to resolve a similar escalating situation the next time it occurs.

as loss of motivation and job engagement [50, 51]. Such conflicts can arise in vertical relations between different levels, but also in relations between employees who work together

Management and Conflict Resolution: Conceptual Tools for Securing Cooperation and Organizational Performance

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72132

15

Much more could be said about conflict in organizations and the general significance of conflict resolution and agreement as conditions for organizational performance, but this falls outside the scope of this chapter. The aim here has been to focus on the practical usefulness of distinguishing between conflict types in managers' resolution practices designed to promote agreement and shared understanding and to pinpoint this in a practical model for conflict resolution. The model can be used in a variety of ways, in a range of contexts and under various circumstances, to understand how destructive conflicts can be prevented,

1 Department of Social Work, Faculty of Health and Social Work, Inland Norway University

2 Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Health and Society, The University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

[1] Rahim MA. Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. The International

[2] Roche W, Teague P, Colvin J. The Oxford Handbook of Conflict Management in Organi-

[3] Drucker P. Management Challenges for the 21st Century. New York: Harper Business;

[4] Cloke K, Goldsmith J. Resolving Conflicts at Work: Ten Strategies for Everyone on the

[5] Wentland D. Organizational Performance in a Nutshell. Charlotte, North Carolina:

[6] Amason AC. Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of

as colleagues.

avoided and resolved.

**Author details**

Halvor Nordby1,2\*

**References**

1999

of Applied Sciences, Norway

\*Address all correspondence to: halvor.nordby@inn.no

Journal of Conflict Management. 2002;**13**:206-235

zations. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014

Job. San Francisco: Wiley; 2011

Information Age Publishing; 2009

Management Journal. 1996;**39**(1):123

The principles in the model can, additionally, be used to analyze situations in which conflicts have not arisen even though there is a risk that they will arise, typically in processes of reorganization. Furthermore, if managers have knowledge of the characteristics of conflict types, they are better prepared to resolve destructive conflicts not only between persons they are managers for but also in their own relations to other people in their organization.

Obviously, the degree to which it is possible for managers to use the resolution model comprehensively will depend on contextual matters. Practical limitations can make it impossible for managers to pursue extensive analyses of conflict situations, but it would be wrong to think that the model is irrelevant in such situations. It does not take much time to explore the six questions above in reactive analysis of a given conflict, during a conflict or in preventive work before a conflict is likely to arise.

The resolution model is generally applicable to conflict situations, but it is particularly useful for dealing with social interaction in organizations. The complexity of the model corresponds to the complexity of organizations in which people come together from a variety of perspectives, with different beliefs, values and interests [36, 49]. These differences influence how conflicts arise in the various ways described above.

Theoretically, the aim of overcoming the diversity of perspectives and reaching agreement in organizational work is often associated with the philosopher Gadamer and his idea of a fusion of horizons [49]. For Gadamer, agreement and absence of conflict are connected to successful communication: it is impossible to separate the issue of how we understand each other from how we agree and cooperate. According to Gadamer, this implies that if people are in a social conflict, then they have not really communicated well.

Gadamer's philosophy has been developed outside an organizational context, but it is widely recognized that it is eminently applicable to organization theory. The heterogeneous nature of many organizations makes it challenging to achieve a shared understanding and a shared sense of commitment. It has been extensively documented that knowledge gaps and lack of contact between various organizational levels can lead to destructive conflicts directly through lack of teamwork and indirectly through lack of psychological effect such as loss of motivation and job engagement [50, 51]. Such conflicts can arise in vertical relations between different levels, but also in relations between employees who work together as colleagues.

Much more could be said about conflict in organizations and the general significance of conflict resolution and agreement as conditions for organizational performance, but this falls outside the scope of this chapter. The aim here has been to focus on the practical usefulness of distinguishing between conflict types in managers' resolution practices designed to promote agreement and shared understanding and to pinpoint this in a practical model for conflict resolution. The model can be used in a variety of ways, in a range of contexts and under various circumstances, to understand how destructive conflicts can be prevented, avoided and resolved.
