Sie sind auf Seite 1von 22

INTER GROUP AND THIRD PARTY

PEACE MAKING INTERVENTIONS

When there is conflict among groups each

groups describes the other in terms of negative


stereotypes.
Interaction and communication between the
groups decreases.

The atmosphere at the workplace is full of


conflicts and misunderstanding.

So two question arises..

So two question arises..


How can we implement conflict-reducing mechanism?
How do we begin?

How do we begin?

Intergroup TeamBuildingInterventions
The focus of this team building groupof OD is on

improving inter-group relations.


OD methods provide ways of increasing intergroup

co-operation and communication.


Blake,

Shepherd and Mouton has developed


activities applicable to stressed situations in the
forms of steps.

Steps
The leader of the two groups are asked if they want an

ameliorative mechanism for the solution.


If yes, the groups meet in separate rooms and build two lists.
The two groups come together to share each other the

information on the list.


Now the groups discuss the areas ofdisagreement and friction

separately and makes a list of priority issues which is usually


much smaller than the previous one.

The two groups come back together and

share there list, after comparing it they


together list the issues which should be
resolved.They set priorities and together they
take action for resolving the problem.
The groups or the leaders assess how the

group are doing there action plan. They follow


up the intergroup team-building activity to
monitor it.

Third party Peacemaking Intervention


-Waltons Approach

Third party peacemaking intervention-Waltons

Approach
Walton has presented a statement of theory and

practice
for
third-party
peace
making
interventions that is important in its own right and
important for its role in organization development.
Waltons method has a lot in common with group

interventions but it is directed more towards,


interpersonal conflict

Third

party
Approach

peacemaking

intervention-Waltons

The basic feature of this third partypeacemaking

intervention is Confrontation i.e. the two principals


must be willing to confront the fact that conflict exists
and that it has consequences on the effectiveness
ofthe two parties involved.
The third party must know how, when and where to

utilize confrontation tactics that surface the conflict for


examination.

Waltons model for diagnosis of conflict situation

The model is based on four elements:


The conflict issues.
Precipitating circumstances.
Conflict relevant acts.
The consequences of the conflict.

Apart from these four key elements of conflict diagnosis it is


also important to know and differentiate the source of conflict.

Sources of Conflict
Emotional Issues
Substantive Issues
Involves
disagreements
over policies andpractices, Involves
negative
competitivebids for the
feelingsbetween
the
parties(e.g.,anger, distrust,
same
resources
and
differing conceptions of
scorn, resentment, fear,
roles
and
role
rejection).
relationships.
Require

problem-solving
and bargainingbehaviors
between theprincipals.

Requires

restructuringperceptions
and
working
through
negative feelings.

Waltons
outline for productive confrontation (process of addressing conflict)
Mutual
positive motivation.

Balance of power.
Synchronization of confrontation efforts.
Differentiation and integration of differentphases of the intervention

must be wellpaced.
Conditions that promote openness should be created.
Reliable communicative signals.
Optimum tension in the situation .

Organizational Mirroring

Questions
1.Describe
the
organizational
mirroring
intervention and its intended use in creating
positive change in the workplace.
2.Describe the steps and goals
organizational mirroring process.

of

the

Set of activities in which host group receives

feedback about how it is perceived and


regarded from reps across organization
Intended to improve inter group relationships
Different
from
inter-group
teambuilding
intervention.

Process
1.Host

group
asks
key
reps
from
interface
group(customer-supplier groups) to meet and provide
feedback
2.Pre- and post interviews by consultant to identify
magnitude of issue(s), prep participants and answer their
questions
3.At the actual session:
1.Opening remarks by manger of host group to set tone
2.Guests use fishbowl discussion to maintain natural flow;

hosts listen
3.Hosts fishbowl discuss, ask for clarification from guests
4.Subgroups of guests and hosts form to identify most
important changes host group needs tomake5.Reconvene in
large group to hear summaries ofeach sub group and form
master task list

Partnering

PARTNERING
Used in situations where two or more entities are likely to incur

unnecessary conflict and/or cost overruns.


A variation of team building and strategic planning
Objective is to form an effective problem finding/problem solving

management team composed of personnel from both the parties,


thus creating a single culture with one set ofgoals and objectives
for the project.
Ideally, partnering involves all the functions in theproject,

including engineering and design, site management, and home


office support.

PARTNERING A CASE
Case involved US Army Corps of Engineers and a Contractor
The Corps of Engineers selected the OD consultants.
A retreat at a natural site with participants including key managers

from home offices, site managers from both the Corps and the
contractor.
Workshop focused on team-building, action research and planning

including advanced conflict resolution methods, development of a


shared vision, and strategic planning to demonstrate the utility of
group decision making.
Lists were developed and shared showing both the strengths and

problems of the Corps and the Contractor

PARTNERING A CASE
Mixed groups, comprising members from both parties, selected

one or more of the problems to diagnose further, identified and


evaluated possible courses ofaction and made recommendations
to the total group.
Mutual commitment to teamwork, equitable problem solving and

open communication was made.


A follow-up workshop was held three months afterproject began.
At six months, on-site data-gathering visits were conducted with

follow-up workshops involving all the key players.

PARTNERING - APPRAISAL
While partnering did not solve all of the problems

that surfaced during the life of the various


projects, high success rates have been reported,
and participant stended to report better results
than on previous non-partnered projects.
As a result, partnering has been used on several

otherlarge government projects involving the Air


Force,Navy, and NASA, and their contractors.

concluding comments
Intergroup

team building , third party


peacemaking, the organization mirror and
partnering are four major interventions that
have been developed to improve intergroup
and interpersonal relations.

All these reduce intergroup and interpersonal

conflict and improve relationships.