ABSTRACT
This research work examines the impact of Conflict Management on Organisational Effectiveness with special reference to Guaranty Trust Bank Plc.
This project is patterned into five chapters, the first deals with the study; it also reveals the statement of problems, objective of the study, significant of the study, research questions and limitations of the study and equally mentions the definitions of terms.
In addition, chapter three deals with methodology and thus adopted the technique of personal interview.
There is a great emphasis on sources of data, population sample and determination of sample size.
Meanwhile, chapter four deals with the summary, conclusion and recommendation of the study.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
According to Kornhanser, Dubin and Russ (1954), conflict can be referred to as “the total range of behaviours and attitude that express opposition and divergent orientation between individual, owners and managers on one hand and working people and their organization, on the other hand. Furthermore, a conflict situation is therefore one that is characterized by the inability of those concerned to iron out their differences, and this does not necessarily have to result in strikes.
Flanders (1968) defined conflict as the difference between an actual state of affairs and a desired state of affairs.
In other words, conflict is the gap between where one is and where one wants to be. Crises are un-expected problem that lead to disaster if not resolved quickly in an acceptable manner. No one can avoid crises and the intensity of the corporate crises in the modern world.
Conflict is an inevitable byproduct of inter-personal dealings. This is particularly true of work groups because-they generally are expediently assembled collection of individuals with different back grounds, perceptions attitudes, and value.
Conflict can be good, bad or ugly and it can be managed in goods, bad and ugly ways. In an organization the issue that generate the most, emotion and frustrated comments is conflict within the organization, we generally do not look at conflict as opportunity but we tend to think about conflict as unpleasant, counter- productive and time consuming.
Conflict that occurs in organization need not be destructive, provided the emergency associated with conflict harnessed and directed towards problem solving and organizationalimprovement, however managing conflict effectively requires that all parties understand the nature of conflict, in the workplace.
The dysfunctional view of organizational conflicts imbedded in the nation that organization are created to manufacture goods by creating structure that perfectly define job responsibilities, authority and other’ job functions, like a clockwork, watch each “Cog knows where it fits, knows how it relates to other part. This traditional view of organization value orderliness; stability and the repression of any conflict that occurs. Using the timepiece analogy we can see the sense in this.
What would happen to traditional watches decide to become less traditional, and redefine their role in the system?
To the “Traditional” organizational thinkers, conflict implies that the organization is not designed or structured correctly or adequately common remedies would be to further elaborate job descriptions, authorities and responsibilities, increase the use of central power (discipline), separate conflicting members etc.
This view of, organization and conflict problems. Unfortunately most of us consciously or unconsciously value some of the characteristic of this “orderly” environment. Problem arise when we not realize that this ways of looking at organization and conflict only fits organization that work in routine ways where innovation and change are virtually eliminated.
The functional view of organizational conflict sees conflicts as a productive process, one that can stimulate members of the organization to increase their knowledge and skills and their contribution to the organizational innovation and productivity unlike the position maintained above, this more modern approach organization then NEEDS conflict so that diverging views can be put on the table, and new views of doing things can be created.
The functional view of conflict also suggests that conflict provides people with feedback about how things are going even “personality conflict” carry information to the manager about what is not working in an organizational affording the opportunity to improve.
We have the good (conflict is positive), the bad (conflict is to be avoided) and now we need to address the ugly.  Ugly occurs where· managers (and perhaps employers) attempt to eliminate or suppress conflict in situations where it is impossible to do so. You know you have ugly in your organization when:-
– Many conflicts run for years people have given up on, resolving and addressing conflict problem in an organization.
– When there is a tendency to look to the manager or formal leader as being responsible for the mess. In fact, that is how most employees would look at the situation, it is true that managers and supervisors play critical roles in determining how conflicts is handled in the organization, but it is also true that the avoidance of ugliness must be a shared responsibilities. Management and employees must work together in a cooperative way to reduce the ugliness, and increase the likelihood that conflict can be channeled into an effective force for change.
In industrial relations, there is no permanently an adversary, either at individual or at group level. There may be times, when a conflict has to be managed bluntly on managerial issues and with intention to achieve long-term managerial objectives. One hopes that manager in public and private enterprises will provide increasing evidence of ability and willingness with such clarity of managerial. However, conflict seems to be inevitably re-accruing in our organizations and institutions.
