Conflict (Mis)Management and (Un)Settlement Through Negotiated Agreements: The Case of Mr. J and Company Z

ANTO COMETA

The Situation, Conflicts and Negotiated Agreements

Mr. J was a former employee of Company Z[1]. He worked as the Search Engine Marketing Manager for almost two years before he decided to leave the company. Aside from his regular work in the company he also had several consultancy work sidelines having the same line of business.

Mr. J could be somewhat tagged as an archetype of an employee who is difficult to handle. Aside from behavioral and attitude-related problems encountered by co-workers, he has constantly violated company procedures and policies such as habitual tardiness and frequent absenteeism. There has been an existence of a hostile working relationship both in the horizontal and vertical domains (relationship conflict) as well as conscious disregard of company rules and regulations which affected not only his own work function and performance but also to those people whose tasks are connected to his (interest conflict). Despite of the outlined predicaments, his expertise in the field of Search Engine Marketing was of considerable significance which made him fairly indispensable or to an extent an asset to the company. This particular situation presented conflicting interests on the company’s end. Initially, the company ignored the matter since it might cause an issue on Mr. J’s end which could lead to his resignation, consequently, have an effect on the operations of the business.

There were attempts of addressing the concerns associated with the employee. There had been discussions conducted in order to identify the factors and reasons of Mr. J’s actions. However, Mr. J’s motivation was plainly monetary in nature. This has presented an opportunity for the company to negotiate in order to finally resolve the problem. Mr. J asked for an increase of 10,000php. The company was willing to give in to the request provided that he would never be late nor be absent for one month. Both parties agreed to the deal since it was deemed as the best possible solution in resolving the matter.

After the period of agreement lapsed, Mr. J didn’t meet the provisions which both parties have agreed. The company decided to take the matter seriously. There has been another negotiation in which Mr. J proposed to change his type of employment from regular full time to regular part-time. The company agreed to the proposal presented by the employee but the job title was to be changed from Manager to Specialist in which Mr. J agreed. In addition, the work shift and schedule is no longer of utmost concern so long as he would inform his immediate superior regarding the days and time he would come to work.

The agreed settlement was neglected by the employee. This has dragged for almost two months. Finally, the company decided to end the employment of Mr. J due to the burden and problems encountered in the workplace and business operations. However, the intent of terminating the employment of Mr. J was not enacted promptly. Two weeks after, the People Services (Human Resource) unit received a resignation letter from Mr. J. Instead of revoking the resignation letter and serving a notice of termination, the company decided to accept the resignation of the employee

BATNA or WATNA?:
Assessment and Reinforcement to the Negotiated Agreements

There were a couple of flaws that were not at the outset foreseen when the negotiated agreements were made by the parties. The established settlements although viewed as effective ways to resolve the issues turned out to be ineffective. The alternatives offered could be seen as short-term in nature since there were no concomitant reinforcements provided in the implementation. Moreover, the measures that were taken have presented precedents wherein the probable outcome or consequences could be undesirable to the company.

The concerns and issues with Mr. J could have been dealt with accordingly if the company had administered counseling and applied progressive disciplinary actions since these are typical behavioral and attitude-related problems in any organization. These progressive disciplinary actions are quite fitting and helpful in doing mid-course corrections. Such corrective actions however, should be constructive in nature as well as reasonable in order for the employee to understand why such actions were carried out. Deliberate ignorance of Mr. J’s violations considering that he was employed as a manager and that there is a behavior expected in line with his position was wide off the mark since there were standards, rules and procedures set by the company to regulate appropriate conduct for all of its employees. Furthermore, it could be deemed as an illustration of workplace inequality as being partial in favor of Mr. J. The employee is a human resource just like the others and giving special considerations to select few puts across discrimination to the rest.

The first negotiated agreement could have been very substantive even successful if the company (or both parties) employed progress evaluation. The settlement could have been the best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) for both since the conditions laid out by the parties prior to coming to the said agreement were generally practical, advantageous and viable. On Mr. J’s end, it could be considered as an economically sound motivation – money as motivator [2] in order to execute the necessary (at the very least) work tasks both expected and needed since the reward is significantly attractive to accommodate his personal endeavors. As for the company, it could be seen as a responsive action to the needs of their workers. Moreover, on the business side, it could be the solution to the problem of performance and functional effectiveness of the operations since work attitude and behavior at some level could influence the outcome. Progress evaluation is the reinforcement to the agreement in view of the fact that work schedule and attendance is oftentimes challenging particularly in cases wherein it is habitually done. By monitoring and assessing the development of the agreement, concerns could be uncovered and raised in a timely manner rather than waiting for the situation to get worse. As appropriate or necessary, based on the evaluation conducted, renegotiate. The renegotiation should still be based on the provisions set forth in the agreement prior to implementation. This is deemed to be the most flexible and apt way of dealing with matters that are not moving in the right direction. This is to facilitate the realization and eventual maintenance of the employee’s work tardiness and absenteeism.

The subsequent negotiation was clearly the worst alternative to a negotiated agreement (WATNA). It was a drastic measure which put the company in a detrimental and unfavorable state. The company did not examine the full implications of the new agreement made which turned to the unsettlement of the main problem. Changing the employment from regular full-time to regular part-time could trim down the productivity and could hamper the operations of the business. Full attention to the operations is a minimum requirement in order to execute the work function properly. This could also affect the tasks and delivery of output of other workers whose responsibilities and accountabilities are connected to his. Furthermore, the modification of the job title to suit the status or type of employment does not add any value nor provide noteworthy additions in the resolution of the issue.

With reference to the employee’s competency and expertise in the abovementioned field that created an impression of having a considerable significance which made him an asset or fairly indispensable to the company could have been purged or remedied if the company at the inception of the situation provided training programs which could equip and increase the skills and aptitude of the other employees. In this particular case it could be applied as part of the contingent plan or succession strategy in the organization. This is to assist employees who are deserving - based on credentials, skills as well as behavior such as commitment to be eligible for planned changes in both function and role in the organization. Trainings are quite beneficial to the company and its workers. To reinforce the training programs, the company should employ (proper) Total Quality Management (TQM) which consists of continuous improvement activities involving everyone in the organization, managers and workers alike in a totally integrated effort toward improving performance at every level.[3] It could be integrated as part of the organizational and professional development program. In a quality organization everyone is constantly learning. Management encourages employees to constantly elevate their level of technical skills and professional expertise. People gain an even greater mastery of their jobs and learn to broaden their capability.[4]

---

[1] Company Z is a European owned and managed Web Services Company that develops PHP-based commercial grade software and performance-based internet marketing services.

[2] A hypothesis (or theory itself) which states that workers are motivated by the need for money. There were a lot of theories which incorporated money as a driving force in the employees work performance such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs among others.

[3] Goetsch, D. and Davis, S. 1997, Introduction to Total Quality – Quality Management for Production, Processing and Services, Second Edition, Prentice Hall, Columbus, Ohio

[4] Scholtes, P. as cited by Goetsch and Davis - Introduction to Total Quality – Quality Management for Production, Processing and Services, Second Edition, Prentice Hall, Columbus, Ohio