UNIT VIII STUDY GUIDE Conflict and Leadership Roles

UNIT VIII STUDY GUIDEConflict and Leadership RolesCourse Learning Outcomes for Unit VIIIReadingAssignmentUpon completion of this unit, students should be able to:1. Evaluate and discuss challenges faced by women in EMS.2. Differentiate between teams and working groups.3. Analyze and discuss strategies used in conflict management andpersonnel development.Chapter 12:Ever-Changing RolesSupplementalReadingSee information below.Learning Activities(Non-Graded)See information below.Key Terms1.2.3.4.5.6.Conflict managementStereotypicalTeam buildingTeam workWomen in leadershipWorking groupsUnit LessonConflict occurs along a full spectrum of human interactions and exists in theEMS as either constructive or destructive. Constructive conflict builds betterworkgroups and improves the organization’s effectiveness. Destructive conflict,however, results in confrontation and unnecessary competition, which reducesorganizational effectiveness and causes intergroup conflict through thedevelopment of out-groups (Deutsch, 2006).In addition to these two types of conflict, additional problems can arise becauseof the organizational structure. EMS can generally be broken down into differentwork groups that subdivide into smaller groups that, many times, present acomplex problem within the agency. This complex problem deals with anorganizational culture that has gradually developed over time and has becomeincompatible due to the assumptions, ideas, values, beliefs, norms, andbehaviors that have become deeply rooted within these smaller groups of theorganization (Marcus, 2006). EMS leaders many times attempt to change thesegradually developed cultural items in an effort to improve the cultural diversity ofthe organization; however, this can result in resistance from these small groups.Nonetheless, “The situation calls for leadership that induces learning when evenleaders do not have a solution in mind” (Heifetz, 1994, p. 75).According to Foster (2013), conflict is normal in any interaction of groups; hefurther stated, “People have their own perceptions and opinions, even when theydo not have a stake in the outcome” (Foster, Goertzen, Nollette, & Nollette,2013, p. 174). What we see as conflict, others may view as simplecompetitiveness. Some competitive or resistant groups are destructive in theway they deal with conflict by escalating just about any dispute (Deutsch, 2006)rather than working to solve it. In looking through the lens of conflict resolution,there are several destructive processes related to the social context of groups,such as inability to understand objective differences in groups, intractability, andresistance within the groups. What does this mean to EMS leaders?Intergroup conflict is believed to originate in objective differences of interest,coupled with antagonistic or controlling attitudes or behaviors of those within thegroup (Fisher, 2006). As subgroups become more and more competitive, normsand values began to form, allowing group members to become comfortable withkidding around, teasing, and telling tall tales about others in the group, who canquickly become (or feel as though they are) the out-group. This, in turn, can leadEMS 3302, EMS Planning and Development1to adversarial and antagonistic ways, allowing destructive conflict to occur basedon objective differences (Fisher, 2006). Fisher also suggested that conflict inintergroups is not just a “matter of misperception or misunderstanding, but isbased on real differences between groups in terms of social power, access toresources, important life values, or other significant incompatibilities” (p. 177).Power plays a definite role in intractability conflict, and leaders must be aware ofthe organizational culture, as well as their own culture, when resolving this typeof disputes. Gray, Coleman, and Putman (2007) espoused, “At any point in thisprocess of perception and interpretation, conflicts can begin to be seen as moreor less important, threatening, and intractable” (p. 2). Competing for social statusand privileges might also fuel intractability. According to Burgess and Burgess(2003), “intractability" can be a controversial concept, with its meaning beingseen differently by different people. In fact, the authors supposed that someleaders believe that negative intractable conflicts are impossible to resolvebecause they feel that the conflict is not worth the effort they will expend in orderto deal with them.Resistance within the group may be seen as negative perceptions anddestructive attitudes toward the people considered to be part of theorganization’s out-group, which may include people who hold different beliefs,norms, and values. This can create social norms that impact social coordinationand communication within the group and influence how individuals commit to theorganization in both the out-group and the in-group (Shivers-Blackwell, 2006).Opotow (2006) proposed that social norms “can set in motion attributions thatemphasize malevolent motives and antagonistic interests, resulting in hostilereactions, conflict escalation, and violence” (p. 522).Points to PonderIn the early 1970s, transportation to the hospital was provided by a local privateambulance service that was part of the funeral home. The fire departmentprovided first response, and the funeral home transported the patient to thehospital.The level of care was very basic, and sometimes there was only a driver and noone attending the patient. Then, in the mid-1970s, the fire department decided topursue providing non-transport EMT services, and the ambulance service wouldtransport patients to the hospital. At the same time, a new program wasdeveloped to train paramedics.During the first class, personnel from the private ambulance and the firedepartment received the same training. In the paramedic program, there wasalways competition between of who was better. The private ambulance beganimmediately allowing their paramedics to provide Advanced Life Support (ALS),while the fire department did not, at least for a few years. During this time,firefighter paramedics were envious of the private ambulance paramedicsbecause they were allowed to perform some very basic procedures throughradio control.Then the fire department established ALS non-transport ambulance service thatresponded to the scene but could not transport. Over a short period of time,competition developed, with both agencies racing to get to the scene to beginALS. Most times, the fire department was first on the scene due to being closerthan the ambulance. Conflicts between some paramedics in both agenciesbegan over "who gets what" due to contention and being the first to start ALS.EMS 3302, EMS Planning and Development2This attitude became very valuable in the terms of bragging rights during thejoint paramedic meetings with the medical director. The topic of who providedthe best critical care often became an issue during case study reviews. Thiscontinued after the meetings with verbal fights that were especially bitter anddestructive. Even today, after many years of providing ALS services to thecommunity, there are still those in each group who have hard feelings towardsthe other group. Private ambulance personnel believe that they provide betterpatient care than fire departments, and fire department personnel believe thatthey provide better care than private ambulances.What are the issues in the scenario? Which type of conflict is it? Are there interrelated issues relating to resources, values of either agency, or even power ofcontrol? Burgess and Burgess (2003) suggested that intractable conflicts arevaried, “but there tend to be multiple, inter-related issues relating to resources,values, power, and basic human needs” (Issues, para. 1). Coleman (2006)further suggested that intractable conflicts usually have an extensive past, aturbulent present, and a murky future.How would you frame strategies for resolving this conflict? Thomas (2008)suggested conflict resolution strategies that would involve encouraging allindividuals and group members towards mutually acceptable solutions bydeveloping a common language that helps individuals communicate clearly.Once a common language has been established, both parties need tocommunicate so that they are clearly understood (Johnson, Johnson & Tjosvold,2006). Next, the conflict should be defined or framed in such a way that bothparties understand that destructive intergroup conflict is a complex and sensitiveconcern for both parties (Thomas, 2008; Fisher, 2006). Both parties need tounderstand that individuals often think of conflict as fighting, characterized byimpulsive, fight-or-flight thinking (Weitzman & Weitzman, 2006), and they mustbe made aware that conflict resolution is a “collaborative process by whichdifferences are handled and the outcomes are jointly agreed to by the parties”(Fisher, 2006, p. 190). In addition, negative stereotypes need to be reversed bycontradicting them, through both direct interactions between parties andeducation (LeBaron, 2003; Burgess, 2003).The collaborative process may at times achieve successful outcomes throughgroup efforts rather than individual understanding that the collaborative processcan be quite passionate at times. This sometimes aggressive passion surfaceswhen individuals express their own views, which are based in different beliefs,values, and experiences from which they construct frames that often differsignificantly (Kaufman, Elliott & Shmueli, 2003-2012). These different points ofreference affect subsequent individual decisions. Bercovitch (2003) warns thatconflicts involving deep-rooted concerns “tend to generate more strife andviolence and become protracted. Intractable conflicts are not just longer-lastingconflicts, they are also more likely to be violent and destructive, and of coursemore difficult to deal with or manage” (On Intractable Conflicts, para. 1).Therefore, conflicting parties should follow a collaborative strategy utilizing athird party, mainly because of the conflict being a contractual issue, as well asbeing deep-seated. “Third party intervention is a typical response to destructiveand persistent social conflict and comes in a number of different forms attendedby a variety of issues” (Fisher, 2001, p. 1). The question is whether individuals orgroups involved in the intergroup conflict view the current situation asdestructive, or even persistent.Even if both parties could develop sustainable and self-correcting solutions thataddress each party’s basic needs, both agencies need to learn how to use theassertiveness and cooperativeness model to understand conflict and the factorsthat influence conflict (Thomas, 2008). Thomas’ model involves introducingEMS 3302, EMS Planning and Development3conflict resolution through modes. Each mode uses a framework to explain theconcepts, suggesting that conflict and individual behavior can be found alongtwo independent dimensions of the framework–assertiveness andcooperativeness. Assertiveness involves individuals attempting to satisfy theirown concerns, while cooperativeness is the degree to which individuals attemptto satisfy the other person’s concerns. The five quadrants of the framework arecompeting, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating. Themodes Thomas described gives insight to parties and the theory of practice forresolving conflict (Thomas, 2008).Our text discusses leaders at all levels. Often, leaders are also followers who areaccountable to someone else in the administrative hierarchy. This unit’s readingfocuses on women in leadership and the challenges they face in a largely maleworkforce, as well as team building and conflict management as keys indeveloping effective training programs.ReferencesBercovitch, J. (2003). Characteristics of intractable conflicts. Retrieved fromhttp://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/Characteristics_IC/.Burgess, H., & Burgess, G. M. (2003). What are intractable conflicts? Retrievedfrom http://www.beyondintractability.org/bi-essay/meaning-intractability.Burgess, H. (2003). Stereotypes / characterization frames. Retrieved fromhttp://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/stereotypes/?nid=1132Coleman, P. (2006). Intractable Conflict. In M. Deutsch, P. Coleman, & E.Marcus (Eds). The handbook of conflict resolution (2nd ed.,pp. 432-436). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Deutsch, M. (2006). Introduction. In M. Deutsch, P. Coleman, & E. Marcus (Eds),The handbook of conflict resolution (2nd ed., pp. 1-20). San Francisco,CA: Wiley.Fisher, R. J. (2001). Methods of third party intervention. Berlin, Germany:Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management.Fisher, R. J. (2006). Intergroup conflict. In Deutsch, M., Coleman, P., & Marcus,E. (Eds), The handbook of conflict resolution (2nd ed., pp. 176-196).San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Foster, D. T., Goertzen, B. J., Nollette, C., & Nollette, F. P. (2013) Emergencyservices leadership: A contemporary approach. Burlington, MA: Jones &Bartlett.Gray, B., Coleman, P., & Putnam, L. L. (2007). Introduction: Intractable conflict:New perspectives on the causes and conditions for change. AmericanBehaviororal Scientist, 2007(50), 1415-1429. Retrieved fromhttp://abs.sagepub.com/content/50/11/1415.full.pdf+htmlHeifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: TheBelknap Press of Harvard University Press.Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Tjosvold, D. (2006). Constructive controversy:The value intellectual opposition. In Deutsch, M., Coleman, P., &Marcus, E. (Eds), The handbook of conflict resolution (2nd ed.,pp. 69-91). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.EMS 3302, EMS Planning and Development4Kaufman, S., Elliott, M. & Shmueli, D. (2003). Frames, Framing and Reframing.Retrieved from http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/framing.LeBaron, M. (2003). Communication tools for understanding cultural differences.Retrieved fromhttp://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/communication_tools/.Marcus, E. C. (2006). Change and conflict: Motivation, resistance, andcommitment. In M. Deutsch, P. Coleman, & E. Marcus (Eds), Thehandbook of conflict resolution (2nd ed., pp. 436-454). San Francisco,CA: Wiley.Opotow, S. (2006). Aggression and violence. In Deutsch, M., Coleman, P., &Marcus, E. (Eds), The handbook of conflict resolution (2nd ed.,pp. 509-532). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Shivers-Blackwell, S. (2006). The Influence of perceptions of organizationalstructure & culture on leadership role requirements: The moderatingimpact of locus of control & self-monitoring. Journal of Leadership &Organizational Studies, 12(4), 27-49. Retrieved fromhttp://jlo.sagepub.com/content/12/4/27.short.Thomas, K. W. (2008). Making conflict management a strategic advantage.Retrieved from https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/conflict_whitepaper.pdf.Supplemental ReadingLearn more about this unit’s topics by researching in the databases of CSU’sonline library. The following are examples of what you can find:“How to handle conflict at work,” by Pam Jones, provides tips on how tomanage conflict involving individuals, teams, and across departments.(Business Source Complete database)“Leadership education and gender roles: think manager, think “?”” byLeAnne Coder and M. Shane Spiller discusses gender stereotypes andleadership characteristics. (General OneFile database)The Internet can also be a valuable resource for information concerning EMS,such as the following:NHTSA: Configurations of EMS Systems: A Pilot StudyThis 2008 document provides an overview of EMS system configurations, aswell as information concerning financing and delivery of EMS. As stated, theobjective of this study is:To understand which EMS systems work well, an important first step is thedevelopment of a typology of system configurations so they may beevaluated on a common basis. This pilot research is a first step towarddeveloping such a typology by characterizing local EMS systems in the MidAtlantic region of the United States.You can find this pilot study online at http://www.ems.gov/pdf/810911.pdfEMS 3302, EMS Planning and Development5Learning Activities (Non-Graded)EMS Leadership PodcastsMore than 100 podcasts in which guest speakers who are EMS leaders,supervisors, and chiefs discuss EMS topics are presented on the EMSLeadership web site. Take time to review the EMS Leadership web site andexplore the wide variety of leadership topics covered athttp://www.emsleadership.com/. These podcasts can be downloaded.Listening to these podcasts, which focus on EMS personnel and issues, couldprovide valuable insights that could help you in your career.What Do You Know About Your Stakeholders?Who are your agency’s stakeholders? What types of relationship do you havewith them? Have the people at your agency ever worked to improve thoserelationships? Are you and the others at your agency politically savvy enough todeal effectively with your stakeholders?The Wrap-Up activity on page 177 of the textbook will help you answer thesequestions about stakeholders, as well as several others. Stakeholders, and youragency’s relationships with them, can be significant factors impacting success orfailure of your agency’s efforts to provide services to the public. Thinking aboutthe questions in the activity and answering them as completely as possible canprovide you with valuable insight into both yourself and your agency. Bring yourcoworkers in on the discussion and work together to find the answers. Yourentire agency will benefit from your increased knowledge about partnerships andrelationships with stakeholders.If you have difficulty or questions with the concepts involved in this activity,contact your instructor for additional discussion and/or explanation.Non-graded Learning Activities are provided to aid students in their course ofstudy. You do not have to submit them. If you have questions, contact yourinstructor for further guidance and information.EMS 3302, EMS Planning and Development6