Stakeholder Differences in Conflict Situations
Projects, companies, or societies have parties who are interested in their success or failure. In this view, stakeholders are actively involved in the operation of a venture or monitor it carefully to ensure that their interests are pursued. While the goals of an organization or undertaking are posited as a unifying factor to all stakeholders, variabilities between such parties can result in notable conflicts. A disagreement between participants is a regular occurrence, and project leaders must undertake conflict resolution to ensure that performance is not undermined and that the established objectives are established. Therefore, understanding stakeholder differences is key to sustaining harmonious working conditions and accomplish success.
One of the primary interventions of resolving a conflict entails understanding the interests of stakeholders. Notably, every party has specific objectives that should be met by the project and act in the promotion of such goals (Prieto-Remón, Cobo-Benita, Ortiz-Marcos, & Uruburu, 2015). For instance, while the customers of a company might be focused on such elements as quality and price, the investors could be motivated by profitability and dominance. The objectives of different stakeholders might align, in some cases, but variations are also common (Omisore & Abiodun, 2014). In the event of a conflict, the mediator must, thus, seek to establish the motivations of each party to determine the most appropriate solution to the spat. If antagonistic interests cause the conflict, the leader can reinstate harmony by realigning the goals of the project to reflect the expectations of every member. Such topics as time and cost should be discussed for progressive endeavors to reassure each party that their outlooks will be addressed.
Understanding normative differences among stakeholders is also vital in conflict resolution. Culture, both social and organizational, have underlying effects on the preferences and expectations of involved parties. Such elements as the method and channel of communication, teamwork, the concept of power, and gender relations can be a cause of tensions for stakeholders (Omisore & Abiodun, 2014). Hence, the project leader or conflict mediator should examine the norms of each party and employ appropriate measures. People with similar preferences can be grouped to reduce conflicts.
During times of change, project goals can be changed to accommodate emerging trends or pursue opportunities established to be beneficial to the stakeholders. However, transitions are usually accompanied by uncertainties that result in conflict and resistance (Semeniuk, 2010). Parties who do not recognize the need for change are likely to oppose the new proposals, thus, creating friction with the leader and other stakeholders. Hence, a conflict mediator needs to establish the implications of a change to an organization or venture, and the position of disagreeing individuals for party-relevant interventions. Such elements as a lack of information, poor relationships, and an unclear perspective about the need for change can create doubt and disagreement between stakeholders. Therefore, while it is essential to understand the interest of each party in a conflict situation, causative factors as an entity undergoing transformation and the ripple effects of such movement should be established to promote relevant negotiation strategies.
Comprehending the differences between stakeholders during conflict is fundamental to achieving accord and success. Markedly, mediators should determine the existence of such variables as varying party objectives, normative dissimilarities, and the process of change, which all might spur disagreements among stakeholders. Acknowledging the presence of such differences allows a leader to have not only an open perspective about the resolution process but also explore appropriate solutions to the problem.