THEORIES OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT

• The Neo-Classical View of Organizational Conflict Elton Mayo

The studies of Elton Mayo (1933) during the 1920s and1930s, which led to the human relations movement, also emphasized the need for minimization or elimination of conflict for increasing organizational effectiveness.

Writers on human relations emphasised the importance of the wider social needs of individuals and gave recognition to the work organisation as a social organisation, the importance of the group, and group values and norm, in influencing individual behaviour at work.

• The Classical View of Organizational Conflict: The classical organization theorists namely, Henri Fayol, Gulick & Urwick, Fredrick Taylor, and Max Weber) did not seem to appreciate different impacts that conflict can have on organizations. This approach to managing organizations was based on the assumption that harmony, cooperation, and the absence of conflict were appropriate for achieving organizational effectiveness.

Fredrick Taylor Frederick Taylor (1911) and his associates believed that the functioning of an organization would improve if the principles of scientific management were implemented. Some of these principles involved the following:

• Fitting of workers to their respective tasks.
• Constant and intimate cooperation of managers and workers. 5. Provision of means to encourage each person to the utmost utilization of his or her capacity.

Henri Fayol Another classical organization theorist was Henry Fayol, a French executive. Fayol advocated that the managerial functions, such as planning, organizing, command, coordination, and control, are applicable to all sorts of organized human endeavour.

• The Modern View of Organizational Conflict

The modern view of conflict, however, is that it is not necessarily dysfunctional for organizations. A moderate amount of conflict, handled in a constructive fashion, is necessary for attaining an optimum level of organizational effectiveness. Rahim observes that healthy organizations seek to increase intra organizational conflict. It does not necessarily signify any organizational weakness as implied by the classical organization theorists or human relationists.

• The philosophy of conflict of the integrationists is the third philosophy, which differs significantly from the previous two.
• The philosophy of conflict of the classicists, or traditionalists, was based on the assumption that conflict was detrimental to an organization and, as such, must be reduced or eliminated.
• The classical stage was followed by the behaviouralists’ philosophy, which can best be described as the recognition that conflict is inevitable in organizations.