Essay Sample on Navigating Conflict: Unlock the Power of the Ladder of Inference

Introduction

Irrespective of where you work, be it in a workplace or the sanctity of your home, conflicts in life are inevitable. For instance, in real-life scenarios, you hardly get the chance to take back what you say inadvertently, but luckily there exists a method that permits you to halt and reexamine or reflect on an interaction. This technique, popularly called the ladder of inference is a part of a conflict management approach designed by Chris Argyris and written in his book The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The Ladder of Inference

Think of a time that you have made an assumption and acted on it, and later found yourself ashamed or embarrassed of what you did because you were lacking vital information or simply becoming unreasonable? It happens to many; from time to time, most people make irrational judgments, but we can and improve our communication skills and avoid these conflicts by applying the to use the ladder of inference model (Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994).

Though we sometimes make uninformed conclusions by jumping from figures inside our activities founded on assumptions or our perceptions of beliefs, we can similarly apply the model to evade these jumps by examining our assumptions before we create a workplace conflict or misjudge In case a conflict occurs, employees can retrace their steps by applying this model, checking their assumptions and resolving the conflicts by themselves (Senge et al., 1994). However, there are times when human resources professional should intervene in a detailed workplace environment

Workplace Investigations

Nowadays, managers spend up to one-fifth of their time resolving employee conflicts (Ramsey, 2005). These fights often reduce productivity, interfere with daily schedules and demoralize the environment. This may lead to aggressive and unsafe hostilities. In the case where these conflicts are not resolved, it spreads the tension throughout the work environment, and the issues affect everyone.

Every conflict has varying causes; these causes can range from competition, frequent restructuring, mergers and downsizing. Employees are encouraged to do more with fewer resources as the stress causes frustration and anger as well as job insecurity. In an unsteady workplace, it is very easy to start an argument because of false impressions founded on cultural differences, narrow-mindedness, prejudice, generation gap or perceived injustices. Managers should intervene during conflicts such as when employees refuse to share information or cooperate as this can disrupt the workplace (Ramsey, 2005).

There are various excellent strategies for studying and resolving workplace conflicts such as sexual harassment in the reading material. We will recommend the amendments that need to be done to the law. We will recommend the activities that need to be done and possible amendments to the regulations affecting the process of investigation.

If your company receives either a formal or an informal complaint, it must be promptly reviewed and investigated by a supervisor. If it appears that the work environment or the employee is under threat from the harasser, then a decision should be made to suspend the harasser to allow for the investigations to proceed (Below & Ptasznik, 2014).

The following three individuals should be interviewed: the reported harasser, the employee presenting the complaint and witness identified as useful or considered to have information relevant to the situation. During the interview, the three individuals should be allowed to explain what transpired without interruptions. Additionally, interviewers should ensure who, what, when, where key questions are answered and documented (Below & Ptasznik, 2014; Woska, 2013).

Interview with the employee who made the complaint: Notify the employee presenting the complaint that she or he will not be subjected to retaliation. It is also important to advise if it's accepted in the company policy, that any individual will be prosecuted for presenting false allegations. Probe the employee who made the complaint to explain what kind of solutions they are expecting from the investigations. They should also write a statement describing the realities of the situation (Below & Ptasznik, 2014).

Interview with the alleged harasser: Carefully examine each occurrence of the reported harassment and provide them a chance to reply. Then, attempt to find the alleged harasser to share their version of the story alongside any other evidence related to the circumstance that supports it. Finally, identify employees whom the investigator should interrogate and justify why (Below & Ptasznik, 2014).

Interview with the witness(es): The witnesses should be provided a general overview of the complaint without any details. Ask the witnesses to record any facts regarding the complaint and elaborate on any inappropriate behavior that he or she witnessed. Assure the witnesses that they will not be subjected to retaliation (Below & Ptasznik, 2014; Woska, 2013). Also, the witnessed doesn't have to be informed that the interview is confidential.

According to Smith (2012), National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) indicated that employees cannot be prohibited from debating on matters of investigations. The NLRB specified that it violates the rights of employees under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The act safeguards concerted actions among union and nonunion employees. According to the NLRB (as cited by Smith, 2012), employers need to raise specific concerns if they need to ask for confidentiality. According to NLRB, legitimate concerns include the following: fears that the evidence will be destroyed, fears that testimony will be fabricated, and need for protection of witnesses (Smith, 2012).

References

Below, J., & Ptasznik, H. (2014). Workplace Harassment Claims: Spending a Little Time Now Can Save You a Lot of Money Later. Michigan Banker, 26(9), 9-10.

Ramsey, R. D. (2005) Interpersonal Conflicts. Supervision, 66(4), 14-17.

Smith, A. (2012, September). Banning Talk of Work Investigations Unlawful. HR Magazine, 11.