Order Description
Case II: Conflict Recognition—
The Case of the Misdirected Faculty
Diane C. Hoelscher, D.D.S., M.S.; Robert W. Comer, D.M.D.
Abstract: Early recognition is fundamental to managing conflict. Successful leaders rely upon their ability to recognize conflict before it escalates into crisis. This article reviews the signs and sources of conflict along with related management theories. Conflict management includes understanding the sources and types of conflict as well as the impact potential; in the case presented, the leaders were unaware of conflict. Dr. Forester, the faculty member “in the middle,” was in a precarious position. Her performance evaluation reflected unacceptable accomplishments. However, her self-assessment, based on the hiring agree- ment, was successful. Her requests for guidance and clarification were unproductive. What does she do now? The management theories that apply to the case of “the misdirected faculty” include analysis and discussion of communication, feedback, and expectancy theory. Action alternatives are presented to explore some of the options available to stimulate discussion and to provide readers with an eclectic approach to applying a case analysis.
Dr. Hoelscher is Interim Chairperson, Department of Operative Restorative Dentistry, University of Detroit Mercy, School of Dentistry, and Dr. Comer is Associate Dean for Patient Services, School of Dentistry, Medical College of Georgia. Direct correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Robert W. Comer, Associate Dean for Patient Services, School of Dentistry, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA 30912-1241; rcomer@mail.mcg.edu.
KCey words: conflict recognition, conflict management, sources of conflict, types of conflict, organizational conflict, faculty development, leadership development, expectancy theory, communication, feedback
onflict is inevitable.1-3 The influences of con- rate with managers to identify the cause, resolve the flict have significant impact on the organi- conflict, or redirect the energy of discord to a posi-
4 zation and may result in either positive or tive outcome.
negative outcomes. Conflict is recognized as the un- derlying power that stimulates innovation, but it is a force with enormous destructive potential.4 In either case, leaders and managers may expect to devote more than one-fifth of their time to conflict-related activities.5
Sources of Conflict
The first purpose of this article is to review the signs and sources of conflict. Second, a case study of “the misdirected faculty” is presented to illustrate a typical academic problem. Finally, the central is- sues in the case are presented along with pertinent management concepts. Readers interested in advanc- ing their leadership skills may use this article as foun- dation material to improve their analytic abilities and conflict management skills.
The basis for recognizing, evaluating, and man- aging any conflict begins with identifying the under- lying causes. Several general sources may precipi- tate conflicts. Tucker identifies potential sources as resource inequities, personality clashes, student/fac- ulty assessment, change, and ideology.6 Montana identifies resource competition, differences in goals, dependence on external constituents, communication, and the organizational structure.7 Taylor’s somewhat novel approach to the sources of conflict includes differences among generations, old versus new knowledge, adapting to new technology, ideological variations, and personalities.8
Journal of Dental Education I Volume 66, No. 4
Conflict Recognition
Conflict is omnipresent. Even though the signs and symptoms may not be recognized, conflict will be present. In any organizational setting, individuals consciously or subconsciously are involved in roles of conflict as they compete for resources, recogni- tion, and rewards. It is the leader’s responsibility to recognize that conflict is present and then collabo-
During the ADEA Leadership Workshop, par- ticipants identified examples of Taylor’s conflict sources. The first was generational differences. Younger faculty may neither accept nor appreciate traditional values of teaching, research, and service espoused by senior faculty. They may not have de- veloped institutional allegiance. They may, instead, present an attitude of independence and recognize the employee advantage in a supply-side economic environment.
A second source of conflict may be the di- chotomy of new knowledge versus old knowledge. Senior faculty members tend to focus on tradition which newer faculty members neither understand nor appreciate. Experience may be a prevailing value of senior faculty, whereas knowledge and opportunity may be more valued by junior faculty. This source of conflict between old and new extends beyond inter- personal relationships and may influence student/fac- ulty interactions in the classrooms. Today’s students may be inclined to gravitate to the younger faculty members’ philosophy and values and demand a cur- riculum shift to new knowledge. According to Tay- lor, students may be less interested in reading, lis- tening to lectures, personal interactions with faculty, or adherence to schedules. Family, jobs, and enter- tainment may take precedence over the regimenta- tion of classroom instruction.
cial rewards than on promotion, tenure, public ac- claim, or other recognition. However, if intangible rewards and recognitions are not judiciously applied, money becomes the only yardstick by which the fac- ulty are measured. Unfortunately, in an environment of salary compression or moderate incremental dif- ferences in salary, conflict may arise when a faculty member’s self-assessment does not correspond with the administration’s recognition and reward systems.
Types of Conflict
The types of conflict are interpersonal, intrapersonal, intergroup, and organizational.1,4,5 Intrapersonal conflict occurs within oneself. The individual must recognize and focus on the internal conflicts of professional and personal relationships and goals. Interpersonal and intergroup conflicts occur between two or more individuals or groups. These generally arise from personality conflicts, com- munication breakdowns, or competition for domi- nance. Finally, organizational conflict occurs be- tween one’s organization and other competing organizations or external constituent groups.5 A school of dentistry may be in conflict with another school when in competition for state appropriations, for example. Similarly, a school may be in conflict with other internal agencies such as third-party payors, private dentists, regulatory agencies, or con- sumers at large.
Impact of Conflict
A third conflict source, old versus new technol- ogy, is an extension of old versus new knowledge. The rapidity with which junior faculty or students may embrace or expect the adoption of new technology may be quite different from the acceptance level by senior faculty. In endodontics, for example, students may expect primary instruction in the use of rotary instruments. Senior faculty may expect the students’ preliminary experience to be the instrumentation of filing canals with hand files. What one group may consider primitive, the other may consider a neces- sary state of the art. Therein lies a potential source of conflict in the introduction of a newer technology.
A fourth source of conflict may be ideological. Senior faculty tend to understand, embrace, and con- tinue an ideological position. Even though the posi- tion may be an appropriate position, junior faculty may fear being subsumed by the older philosophy. However, there is an undercurrent of concern that the ideological standard-bearers may be out of touch, especially with the expectations of students. The jun- ior faculty member may gravitate toward excellence in teaching, for instance, rather than the traditional ideological expectation of excellence in the tripar- tite commitment of teaching, research, and service.
Conflict varies on a continuum between total conflict and total cooperation.6 Neither of the ex- tremes is desirable. Total conflict will lead to chaos and organizational destruction. Total cooperation implies an absence of underlying competitive pres- sures that tend to drive personal advancements, or- ganizational progress, or product improvements. Without these stimuli or pressures, stagnation or sta- tus quo is the most likely outcome. In a competitive environment, the status quo will result in decline. Conflict may vary along the sliding scale of a con- flict continuum as presented in Figure 1, which is a modification of Tucker’s model.
Personalities are a fifth source of conflict. Managing personalities may present the most chal- lenging aspect of conflict management. In the aca- demic arena, a manager’s ability to recognize and reward faculty has inherent constraints. As an ex- ample, faculty recognize that major financial rewards are unlikely in the academic advancement process. As a result, they may place a lower value on finan-
Collaboration implies that competing units or individuals cooperate for mutual advancement. Both make concessions; both commit their resources; and both are rewarded for the combined efforts. Friendly conflict frequently promotes competition that stimu-
Figure 1. The conflict continuum
Source: Tucker A. Chairing the academic department leadership among peers, 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984.
lates conflicting groups to produce at a higher level. In industry, prizes for exceeding sales quotas exem- plify friendly conflict. In academics, subtle compe- tition for recognition by students who present “Golden Apple” awards would be a type of friendly conflict. Controlled conflict recognizes that resolu- tion of conflict is unlikely, but that competing groups can coexist and prosper together.
of the Department of Restorative Dentistry, informed her that she could choose either a tenure-track or clini- cal track position. Dr. Forester considered her love of clinical dentistry as well as the fact that she and her husband were ready to start a family and opted for the clinical track, reasoning that she would be better able to balance her responsibilities without the pressure to obtain tenure. The concept of a clinical track appointment was a relatively new one for NUSD at the time of Dr. Forester’s appointment.
The next pole on the scale is total conflict. Sus- tained total conflict may quickly evolve into chaos. In academics, there is a possible danger to organiza- tional stability and effectiveness if pressures are skew- ing the profile conflict to the right. The academic en- vironment encourages open forums and challenges to authority and tradition. These challenges are frequently disguised as friendly conflict when challengers play the devil’s advocate. In academic administration, one must be cautioned to recognize individuals who play such a devil’s advocate role. Although this privilege is sacred in academic circles, there is a fine line between playing the role of the advocate versus personifying the devil incarnate. The quality of leadership may de- termine if the conflict strengthens or compromises the organization.
At NUSD, Dean Carol Markin was very con- cerned about the low level of research activity at the school and the fact that faculty, especially junior fac- ulty, were very heavily assigned to clinic and courses. She had reduced the teaching assignments of junior tenure-track faculty and facilitated the hiring of clini- cal track faculty whose primary responsibility was teaching in the clinic. Faculty at the school had mixed feelings about these changes. Those in the tenure track were relieved that they now had more time for scholarly activity; however, many were uneasy that the role of clinical track faculty was not well defined.
Case Review: The Misdirected Faculty
For four years, Dr. Sandy Forester has taught in and directed the AEGD program at the same midwestern dental school from which she received both her dental degree and AEGD certificate. After her husband took an engineering position in a nearby state, she sought an appointment at Nobel Univer- sity School of Dentistry (NUSD), a small private school in an urban area with a longstanding tradition of educating highly qualified clinical dentists. At the time of her application, Dr. Steve Williams, the chair
During the next five years, Dr. Forester dem- onstrated excellence in teaching and was named a clinical group leader. At the same time, she was very busy in her personal life, giving birth to two children two years apart. Each year she received positive feed- back during her performance evaluation, which in- cluded student and peer evaluations. She was very busy teaching, but she also continually sought new challenges and opportunities for growth.
At the same time, Dean Markin and Dr. Will- iams were busily increasing research activity at the school. The restorative department now had an ac- tive program with many small grants. The depart- ment members collaborated well with one another, and Dr. Forester took the opportunity to participate in several small projects that lead to IADR abstracts and a couple of manuscripts. She worked hard to fit in her research activities with her heavy teaching and
administrative commitments. This, in addition to meeting her young family’s needs, took up much of her time and, as a result, she was not involved much with committees or organized dentistry. Dr. Williams felt that Dr. Forester’s research activity was impor- tant, and he was impressed by her motivation to pur- sue an area that was not part of her job description. He wasn’t concerned that service was not a major area of emphasis for Dr. Forester, and he told her this on several occasions. Dr. Forester appreciated that Dr. Williams gave her the freedom and support to develop in an area that was important to her.
ing and for her administrative work. Then he asked her why she sat on only one school committee and belonged only to the IADR. He stated that she was weak in the service area of her development and that she would lose several performance points because of that. Dr. Forester felt her face flush as she asked him how many points she earned for her research activity. He told her that there were no points awarded for research since she was on the clinical track. He then suggested that she join the Admissions Com- mittee.
In the meantime, the Faculty Governance of the dental school made changes to its bylaws and promotion and tenure documents to include this new group of faculty. Because this was done after many of the clinical track appointments were made, the changes were somewhat vague and open-ended. However, Faculty Governance did pass strict limita- tions on the number of clinical track appointments and made it clear that faculty could not switch from tenure to clinical track or vice versa. Interestingly, it wasn’t until after most of the revisions were made that clinical track faculty were given the right to vote on Faculty Governance issues.
Dr. Forester knew that the weekly meetings and interviews would take what little time she had set aside for research. She cautiously asked Dr. Marino if there was any chance she could be released from clinic one half day a week to meet these additional responsibilities. She could see Dr. Marino’s jaw clench as he told her that she was no longer working for Dr. Williams and that she was now in a depart- ment with a heavy clinical focus. She would need to rearrange her priorities to meet the mission of the department. Dr. Marino further suggested she work on her research in the evenings or on weekends; af- ter all, he said, that’s how he had completed much of his research.
Last year Dr. Forester was transferred to the newly formed Department of General Dentistry. At the time she was concerned her new chairperson, Dr. Tony Marino, might not be as supportive as Dr. Will- iams. Indeed, Dr. Marino was busy with clinic admin- istration and was unavailable to mentor her as had Dr. Williams. Dr. Forester was more than a little anxious as she prepared for her annual performance review. Both of her appointments with Dr. Marino for perfor- mance review were interrupted by phone calls, and they never actually addressed her concerns. She tried a few other times to schedule appointments with Dr. Marino, but they were all cancelled at the last minute due to pressing clinic issues.
The sudden ringing of the phone caused Dr. Forester to jump. After hanging up, Dr. Marino quickly excused himself and was out of the room before she could even respond.
Still, Dr. Forester hoped to apply for promotion to Clinical Associate Professor in the next year. She knew that her evaluations by students and peers were excellent, and she was commended regularly on her effective management of her clinical group. But she had no idea how supportive Dr. Marino would be.
Case Analysis
Conflict is a vexing problem. Organizational change leads to conflict, and conflict stimulates or- ganizational change. Heifetz and Laurice describe conflict as the “engine of creativity and learning.”4 In academics, as any other organization, conflict should be expected. However, successful recognition of the sources of conflict and the underlying prob- lems is essential in management.5
Dr. Forester sat in her seat unable to move. She thought of her two little girls and husband. She had a happy life and liked it at NUSD. She had never had a negative performance review. Now it appeared that she would not be supported in her development, let alone for promotion. She knew she was locked into the clinical track and that there was no precedent for what she was trying to do. For the first time in six years, the option of leaving NUSD entered her mind.
She got her answer the morning of her perfor- mance review. After anxiously waiting twenty min- utes for Dr. Marino to arrive, she entered his office. He cleared a pile of clinic activity sheets from the chair and invited her to sit. He told her that she had achieved all possible performance points for teach-
April 2002 I Journal of Dental Education
A significant potential for conflict exists when- ever people with differing values and expectations are involved in an organization. Administrators with leadership ability understand the origins of conflict, anticipate its occurrence, and develop skills and tech- niques for managing conflict. They are likely to be more successful and satisfied with their responsibili- ties and results. This case illustrates key issues and concepts that interrelate when conflict recognition and management are needed.
unsuccessful. In this case, the communication and goals relating to Dr. Forester’s transfer were not clearly understood or relayed from Dean Markin through the chair (Dr. Marino) to Dr. Forester.
In this case, neither the dean, Dr. Markin, nor the department chair, Dr. Marino, is aware of the conflict. From their perspective, the problem is de- fined as unacceptable outcomes from Dr. Forester. Therefore, neither is likely to take the leadership ini- tiative to resolve the conflict. Dr. Forester’s perspec- tive, of course, is quite different. She defines the prob- lem as lack of leadership, poor communication, or failure of administration. If she expects a favorable resolution of her problem, she will need to take the initiative to lead her superiors into constructive dis- cussions or accept the consequences of their assess- ment of her performance. Regardless of the perspec- tive, the sources of this conflict are ideological and personality differences. The type of conflict is inter- personal between Drs. Forester and Marino.
Both Drs. Forester and Marino may have sub- consciously resisted the change for several reasons. The source of resistance may have arisen from per- ceptions of fear of the unknown, personal insecurity, failure to see the need for change, threatened self- interests, or changes in working relationships.5 A successful leader, Dean Markin in this case, should have anticipated a resistant response to change and initiated some proactive measures to ensure conflict was minimized and the transition was orderly. In the absence of this preparatory communication, Dean Markin’s next challenge may be more difficult. Is it important to keep Dr. Forester in the organization? If so, how could he maintain a positive attitude and productive atmosphere? What damage control mea- sures would be necessary to improve the relation- ship between a valuable chair and a valuable faculty member? If one assumes that maintaining an em- ployee is desirable and developing a positive rela- tionship is possible, then the administrator’s charge should be clear. The administrator must focus on communication. Leaders and managers both have important roles and both could be successful. If they are effective communicators, each should concen- trate on reinforcing the mission with feedback.
Central Issue #2: Victimized Faculty
Central Issue #1: Unacceptable Performance
Dean Markin had engineered an organizational change that moved Dr. Forester from one department to another. There was an ideological difference among all the players in this scenario. Dr. Forester assessed her own performance as excellent, and it was accept- able as defined by her former chair, Dr. Williams. However, after a performance review, the new chair, Dr. Marino, decided that her accomplishments in service were unacceptable. Even though her teach- ing and research assessments exceeded expectations, Dr. Marino informed Dr. Forester that her overall contributions were unacceptable.
Dr. Forester exhibited signs that she was frus- trated and had been victimized by the change in her assignments. Her frustration arose from a shift in management styles as a result of the recent reorgani- zation. She was consulted about neither the change in assignment nor the shift in her expected priorities by the administration. She was perplexed, leading her during the course of the meeting to figuratively throw up her hands and ask, “What do you expect?” This case thus presents the management challenge of balancing the staff member’s expectations with her ability and effort. Recognizing this expectancy gap early simplifies the redirection or resolution of the conflict.
Relevant Management Concept: Communi- cation and Feedback. Communication and reinforc- ing feedback are essential tools for managing con- flict.3 An administrator’s essential task is to clarify the institutional goals, identify the importance of the staff’s role in the organization, and articulate the ben- efits of the organizational expectations and direction. The concept is basic. However, the potential for es- calating conflict is enormous if administrators are
Relevant Management Concept: Expectancy Theory. Interpersonal conflict is evident between Dr. Forester and her chair. Compounding the problem is her intrapersonal (internal) frustration in being un-
able to define or accept the expectations of Dr. Marino.
nel the employee’s efforts and abilities to achieve the externally moderated rewards that are valued to the organization.
Expectancy theory provides some insight into this dilemma. Expectancy theory addresses relation- ships between performance and satisfaction.5,9 Sat- isfaction for many is internalized as an outcome of reward and effort expended. This reward:effort ratio determines effort. Effort subsequently is influenced by abilities and values, and it determines perfor- mance. Diagrammatically, these relationships are il- lustrated in Figure 2.8 The cycle of performance (start- ing with the right segment of the diagram) may be exemplified by the employee who is satisfied that an effort of 10 percent yielded a 5 percent reward. Be- cause of the low reward:effort ratio, one might ex- pect the employee to demonstrate the same ability and values, yet the effort may be proportionally lower.
The leadership challenges are diverse for the principals in this case. Dean Markin should have been aware of the potential for conflict. She should have initiated reinforcing communication to ensure that Dr. Marino understood, communicated, and moti- vated his subordinates. Dr. Marino’s leadership chal- lenge was to recognize and be sensitive to the intrapersonal strife of Dr. Forester. He should then have initiated further communication and evaluation sessions for reinforcement. And, finally, Dr. Forester should have taken the initiative to meet with Dr. Marino with a specific agenda to clarify her role and expectations.
A second scenario is common. Frequently, all employees in a group receive equal percentage sal- ary increases. The employee may translate this re- ward of effort as average, while assuming individual efforts have been high. Management may interpret the equal raises as a gesture of fairness for a group all of whom performed similarly whether excellent or average. In either case, there is a disparity in which the employee’s internal reward system reaches a con- clusion of excellence, whereas the external rewards system of management judges performance as me- diocre. Employees’ internal assessments may be sharply influenced by the internal values of energy expended and length of a CV, while management’s external rewards support the intrinsic value of team- work and outcomes instead of effort or ability. In either situation, communication is required to chan-
Action Alternatives
The administrative challenge in this case was to balance the department’s output in teaching re- search, service, and faculty development. Dr. Marino’s specific alternatives could include the fol- lowing:
• Communication. Dr. Marino should have clarified
the departmental expectations and presented an equitable overview of each faculty member’s role in the organization.
• Prompt intercession. Dr. Marino was in a difficult situation. However, the frustration expressed by Dr. Forester had not yet escalated to a complex or crisis situation. Careful preparation would be es- sential for a follow-up conversation and continu- ing reinforcement of the balance between Dr.
Figure 2. Expectancy theory
Source: Taylor Robert L. Leadership strategies for department chairs and program directors. Lecture at Faculty Development Workshop, American Dental Education Association Annual Session, Chicago, IL, March 3, 2001.
April 2002 I Journal of Dental Education 531
Forester’s expectations and departmental expec- tations. These conversations should demonstrate a positive attitude, be brief and clear, and acknowl- edge Dr. Forester’s past accomplishments and fu- ture value.
The expectations of the leadership, the faculty, and the faculty managers must be clear to all parties so that the sources of conflict will be minimized. The faculty and the administrator both must understand and support the expectations of the institution and the individuals within it. The manager must demon- strate a caring attitude and assume that a mutually beneficial outcome is attainable.
Acknowledgments
The authors appreciate the contributions, guid- ance, and support of Dr. Robert Taylor for his exper- tise as the faculty development workshop facilitator. Contributors to this case development included Wendy E. Kerschbaum, D. Denee Thomas, Carol- Ann Trotman, Robert Trombly, and the rest of the class of 2001 ADEA Leadership Fellows. Special thanks also goes to Dr. Karl Haden, Director of the ADEA Leadership Institute, for his support, leader- ship, and assistance.
REFERENCES
1. 2. 3.
4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
9.
• Reengage promotion and tenure discussions. Fac- ulty need to be informed of the subtle shifts and vague nature of the promotion and tenure system. In this case, apparently the rules had not changed, but the norms were changing. Dr. Marino needed to review the tenure guidelines, negotiate for fa- vorable application of the rules, consult with the faculty, and explore creative opportunities to get the faculty to “buy-in” to the process. The faculty needed to be invited as active participants in the development process.
• Contingency development. Dr. Marino should have considered the benefits or problems that may evolve from the following possible outcomes:
– Dr. Forester may resign.
– Dr. Forester may circumvent Dr. Marino and
petition Dean Markin for support.
– Promotion and tenure guidelines may change.
Conclusion
Autry JA. Love and profit: the art of caring leadership. New York: Avon Books, 1991.
Lucas AF. Strengthening departmental leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994.
The first stage of resolving any conflict is to define the problem and then to identify the cause.8 In this case, the problems of inadequate performance and frustration of a faculty member are evident. The cause arises from administrative reorganization, which pre- cipitates interpersonal conflict between Dr. Forester and Dr. Marino, even as the sources of conflict have ideological as well as personality influences.
Higgerson ML, Cashin WE, Gmelch WH. Communica- tion skills for department chairs. Bolton, MA: Anker Pub- lishing Company, 1996.
Heifetz RA, Laurie DL. The work of leadership. In: Rosenbach WE, Taylor RL, eds. Contemporary issues in leadership. Boulder: Westview Press, 1998:179-94. Buhler P. Management skills. Indianapolis: BookEnds, LLC, 2001.
The leadership challenge is to create a positive outcome for this or any other conflict. The critical task is establishing communication so that redirection or reengaging faculty in early stage conflict becomes possible. The awkward challenge for the administra- tor is to recognize the problem and develop a con- structive environment for communication. These con- versations must be positive, informal, and humane.
nd
among peers, 2 ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing
Tucker A. Chairing the academic department: leadership
Company, 1984.
Montana P. Management. New York: Barron’s Educational Series, 1991.
Taylor RL. Leadership strategies for department chairs and program directors. Lecture at Faculty Development Workshop, American Dental Education Association An- nual Session, Chicago, IL, March 3, 2001.
Vroom VH. Work and motivation. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass Publishers, 1995.
The question is here
Penalty on plagiarism
The following is the standard plagiarism penalty applied across branches as per Article 11 of the university by-laws:
1) Awarding of zero for a TMA wherein more than 20% of the content is plagiarized.
2) Documentation of warning in student record.
3) Failure in the course to dismissal from the University.
All University programmes are required to apply penalties that are consistent with the University by laws.
Examples of Plagiarism
Copying from a single or multiple sources, this is where the student uses one or more of the following as the basis for the whole, or a good part, of the assignment:
1. Published or unpublished books, articles or reports
2. The Internet
3. The media (e.g.TV programmes, radio programmes or newspaper articles)
4. An essay from an essay bank
5. A piece of work previously submitted by another student
6. Copying from a text which is about to be submitted for the same assignment
Introduction
This TMA has one question with three sub sections. You should answer them all. The questions in this assignment are all about different aspects of the process of exploring a complex situation.
Question 1 (100% marks)
You are strongly advised to use the AOU e-library to locate additional relevant resources which can support your analysis and argument. This will earn you extra points.
(a) Read through the attached article “Case II: Conflict Recognition-The Case of the Misdirected Faculty”, as you read through the article, create one Spray diagram to summarize the different ideas of the article respecting the conventions, and techniques. It is advised that students submit hand drawn diagrams as opposed to computer generated ones. Photocopies of diagrams should not be accepted. Reflect on your diagram in no more than 200 words. (15 Marks)
(b) Based on what you learned in T205A (T552/Diagramming), and on the content of the article, and taking conflict as your system of interest draw a System Map diagram to show all the components of such a system. The system map should include all the components of the system paying special attention to the grouping and the hierarchy. Reflect on your diagram in no more than 200 words (15 Marks)
(c) Based on what you learned in T205A concept file 02, and T551 Linear Programming:
1- Describe what is meant by conflict, its nature and sources. (Word Count 400; 10 Marks).
2- Analyze the type of situations discussed in the case; justify your answer based on what you learned in T551 linear programing (Word Count 400; 10 Marks).
3- Assess the validity of applying each of the three ways of thinking (causal, logical, and reductionist) for understanding the problem discussed in the case. (Word Count 500; 15 Marks).
4- Discuss the different types of contracts which govern the relationship between employers and their employees and assess how each one is manifested in the case. Analyze whether a breach has occurred and what are its causes and effects (Word Count 500; 15 Marks).
5- Analyze the sources of the conflict in the case and assess how and whether applying the systems approach to the problem in the case can improve and enlighten understanding (Word Count 300; 10 Marks).
6- Using a systems’ approach, and relying on concepts covered in concept file 02 including communication, active listening, and conflict resolution, assess possible ways for resolving the conflict taking place. (Word count 350, 10 Marks)
?
(2000 words) (70 marks) (Please see guidance below)
General Mark’s deductions of 20% as follows
• PT3 Form (failure to use the PT3 completely filled) (deduct up to 5% marks)
• TMA Presentation and Structure, and word count?(untidy, work way below or above the word count, no display of word count) (deduct up to 5% marks)
• Referencing and in-text citation (poor referencing and in-text citation, without plagiarism, (deduct up to 10% marks).
TMA Guidance to students
(a) Note that the submission for this question requires your rough spray diagrams, and a condensed or tided up version. You should do your best to follow the conventions for the spray diagram as explained in T552. It is also important that the diagram communicates to your tutor, so make sure the writing is legible and not too small. However, don’t redraw your initial rough spray diagrams just to tidy them up; we want to see what you drew as you worked. You need to identify the main idea of the article and include it within your central topic, and then identify the most important points and include them within the subtopics blobs then branch out as explained in T552 appendix (A1.1.)
(b) Here you are required to draw a system map, which includes all the relevant components of the case “Case II: Conflict Recognition-The Case of the Misdirected Faculty” as discussed in the case without neglecting the assumptions. Your tutor’s feedback will be helpful in clarifying to you any misconceptions you might have about drawing the diagram and it will also help in assessing your diagramming skills.
(c) Here you are required to draw back on concepts learned in T551 and Concept file 02 (as relevant) in order to analyze the questions. Please remember that for each section you need to provide a clear theoretical discussion, and then explain how those concepts are applied in the case on hand. Again you are strongly advised to use your own words to discuss the concepts as you understood them. Do not copy material from the books since it will have a negative impact on your grade, and very importantly do not get consumed in a purely theoretical analysis without assessing how these concepts are applied in the case study. Make sure to respect the word count as it is an indicator to you of the depth of analysis required. Please remember that failure to paraphrase, and to reference will also lead to failing the TMA.
There are different ways to tackle and structure your ideas. Please remember that your work should be structured in an essay format with a clear introduction, then possibly different subsections (as needed) to assess each idea and a conclusion.
The introduction should set out the topic of the discussion clearly. For each of the body paragraphs/sub-sections you need to provide a clear theoretical discussion which explains how the relevant course concepts are related to the article on hand. The conclusion should summarize your findings and reflect on your learning. You should not write in the first person (i.e. I think), the third person is more appropriate for college level writing (i.e. we can conclude), but in any case it is preferable to avoid both styles and to state your argument (i.e. instead of saying “this essay will tackle the ways of thinking and the systems thinking approach”, you can start with a statement about system’s thinking in organizations). Similarly in your conclusion you should not use “it could be concluded”, rather simply restate the main points and your findings.
End of TMA Questions