When the conflicts presented reach the crescendo, the various organizational heads make use of bargaining techniques that help in solving the problems to a great extent.
This is one of the first techniques that the management tries to use in case of its employees. The concerned employees or the persons who are part of this conflict are personally called for, and their demands are heard. Then the authority tries to subdue them by honeyed words and a certain set of promises.
However, in doing so, in most cases, the situation is approached by the managers in such a manner that the concerned parties are not able to say anything much. Not just that, in most cases, since the problem is casually shrugged away and workers tried to subdue, hence the real problem is not taken into account.
When the problem is just too much on the face and there is no way the opposition can be subsumed, the concept of forcible decision is put forth. Though, for any organization, this brings a number of issues and unfortunate precedents, however, what the whole problem is forcibly stopped and the employees’ demands are not taken into consideration.
Certain organizations follow this policy, and there are high chances that the concerned parties may get a termination letter of they do not match the demands of the managerial position holders.
It is the policy of majority of organizations to avoid the major cause of the conflict and carry on working on a daily basis. It is widely understood that a particular conflict and further expression associated with that conflict arises only when there is a proper apparatus for depicting that grievance.
When the organization does not provide the outlet for that conflict to be depicted, then there is no chance that the conflict can surface. Now, however, most of the companies have to be responsive to the demands of the employees, or have to care for any such issue, since there are legal options that can be checked up by the employees.
When any conflict arises, and all other methods either fail to function or the companies cannot apply them to the concerned parties, it can so happen that both parties come to a compromising situation. In this case, the attacking parties tone down their demands and agree to mutually come to a certain point that is beneficial to them at that moment.
However, if it is seen from a wider perspective, this method fails to address the needs of both parties since each of them has their own agenda that is not fulfilled.
This is one of the earliest and most apt methods that should be used by any organization. However, to a great extent using of this process depends on the type of problems that a particular organization is facing.
In this case, both the parties are to sit together and discuss the issues that are bothering them – the main cause of conflict and try to find solutions to that. It may so happen that diverse parties will have different views, but in most cases, the problem is solved.
Though in most cases the concerned parties are too concerned with solving their own problems and the common agenda that is there regarding the solution of problems takes a backseat. However, seen on a wider note, this is definitely the most productive strategy that the organizations can follow.
In most cases, these techniques help in solving the problems easily.