ABSTRACT

Conflict and conflict management is undoubtedly very critical in any setting; organisations are no exception. The type of conflict management in organisations plays an essential role when it comes to achieving missions and visions. ADR is gaining widespread attention. Research on adoption of ADR mechanisms is practically non existent in Ghana. This research reviews the adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Ghana and examines the incidence in firms of ADR practices addressing individual and group grievances and disputes. The paper reveals the limited diffusion to date of ADR practices and shows that the uptake of ADR is associated with the degree to which firms have adopted high-commitment HRM practices. It adopts the qualitative method to adequately examine the techniques adopted in organizations in terms of conflict management. Organizations that place importance on developing people-centred HRM policies are more likely to be disposed to adopting state-of-the-art conflict management practices designed to solve workplace problems quickly and fairly.

x

xi

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

   Background of the Study

Conflict is a human factor that is pervasive in organisations. It is neither destructive nor constructive, however, it would depend on how it is managed or practiced in organisational settings. Thus, organisations ought to search for the means of managing conflict in such ways that conflicts can be useful for solving organisational problems, strengthening employee relationship and developing them. Accordingly, Teague, Roche and Hann (2012) assert that organisational conflict, how it shows itself and how it is managed plays an integral role in managing employment relationship. The reason is that, organisations are likely to be affected adversely when organisational disputes are not settled fairly and effectively. Industrial action may lead to lost days, high rates of absenteeism, and employer–employee relations could be strained if not resentful as a result of conflict. Disputes can obstruct organisations from creating adaptable mechanisms to thrive in the modern business setting (Bendersky, 2003). Nonetheless, organisations that adopt efficient conflict management measures are most often than not, prone to have workers who feel they have self-respect and justness at the workplace and are more devoted to the mission and vision of the organisation (Costantino & Sickles Merchant,1996). It is quite uncertain what a good and effective conflict management system is made up of, although an effective conflict management system is likely to depend on a number of factors for instance, the type of the disputes in existence in the organisation, the rights and interests of the parties involved and perhaps most important of all, the quality of the conflict management processes (Bingham & Nabatchi 2003).

Conventional personnel management generally used an unemotional, calm and phlegmatic attitude to settle organisational conflict (Teague et al, 2012). One common practice was for Human Resource (HR) managers to play a problem-solving role inside the organisation by

interacting with trade unions to solve either small-scale problems or to prevent imminent large- scale industrial unrest (Legge, 1995). In this situation, the employee was never included in the process, thus his interest was not properly addressed. A distinct group of conflict as well as innovative approaches to resolving and even preventing conflict in the business setting. These distinct practices are usually termed alternative dispute resolution commonly known as ADR practices.

Whereas conventional approaches to conflict management frequently involved the exercise of power play between disputants, in which a party (usually the employer) tried to levy their willpower on the other (usually, the employee), or involved using measures to ascertain rights under collective agreements, company policy or the law, ADR practices seek to resolve conflict wherever possible on the basis of the parties seeking to discover jointly beneficial and acceptable means of furthering their ‘interests’ (Costantino & Sickles Merchant, 1996; Ury, Brett & Goldberg, 1993).

ADR practices are not entirely new and date back to the 1960s, but the topic started gaining popularity in the 1980s when HR personnel in big organisations hunted for means to curtail the considerable rise in courtroom litigation on organisational problems (Goldberg, Green & Sander 1985; Teague, 2006). ADR practices were generally perceived as stalling the litigation process or completely keeping organisational disputes out of the courts and enabling their resolution inside the organisation a concept which was readily embraced by organisations that constantly found themselves in litigation. In recent years, the relatively new notion of ADR has gained widespread attention in the organisational conflict management literature and even for some, it signifies the basis of a high quality conflict management system since it seeks to empower parties involved in a dispute to use mutually beneficial processes to settle their differences to their satisfaction (Cropanzano, Bowen &Gilliland, 2008). These practices may include but not limited to the operation of formal open-door procedures, where employees with

grievances seek access to any manager in search for a solution, skipping over their immediate manager or supervisor if they believe this is warranted by the nature of the grievance which concerns them (Ewing, 1989).

Also among the ADR group are ‘hotline’ or email-based ‘speak-up’ systems which can disclose information to employees, answer to problems or refer employees to other processes for resolving grievances in firms, without the stringent old methods (Lewin, 2011; Rowe & Baker 1984). Mediators; both external an internal, conciliators or other experts may also be used to determine disputes. Again, another common procedure linked with ADR is the adoption and use of review panels comprised of managers or employees’ peers (to understand both sides) and the use of arbitrators in a binding arbitration process as a final stage in dispute resolution (Teague et al 2012). A standard approach more or less, is for HR managers to co-manage organisational procedures with line managers to handle disciplinary and grievance issues (Folger & Cropanzano 1998).

   Problem Statement

Conflict in the workplace is unavoidable. Peaceful conflict resolution in the organisation is likely to sustain the mission and vision of the organisation. Constructively handling conflict produces considerate and researched decisions which move the organisation toward obtaining its objectives. However, dealing with conflict destructively, may result in bad decisions, low employee morale and a tense working environment that moves the organisation away from its objectives. Thus, Successful organisations would deal with conflict in a way that advances rather than destroy employee relationships and would always endeavour to leave all parties content with their outcomes.

A widely popular view in the western world, particularly in the United States of America (USA), is that institutions have adopted more effective conflict management techniques as part

of the new innovative measures designed to make the HR Management function more strategic. For the most part, these new and modern practices and procedures have been greatly shaped by brilliant thinking on the use of ADR to tackle institutional conflict (Colvin, Klaas & Mahony 2006). Using ADR-inspired practices to enhance conflict management systems therefore undoubtedly contributes to creating of high-performance HRM architectures inside organisations (Dunlop & Zack 1997).

Outside the USA, limited empirical work has been done on the degree to which HR managers are diffusing innovative conflict management practices (Teague et al, 2012). Thus, little is known about the extent to which organisations are experimenting with contemporary approaches to handling conflict at work or whether ground breaking conflict management practices are considered to be an important part of the strategic HRM toolbox used by HRM managers.

Outside the USA, limited empirical work has been done on the degree to which HR managers are diffusing innovative conflict management practices (Teague et al, 2012). Thus, little is known about the extent to which organisations are adapting new approaches to handling conflict at work or whether innovative conflict management practices are considered to be an important part of the strategic HRM toolbox used by HRM managers.

Extant literature suggests that some firms may be in a better position than others to introduce innovative conflict management policies, irrespective of how they approach the conduct of HRM (Teague et al, 2012). Multinational organisations have a substantial and important presence in the Ghanaian economy (Mahmoud, Hinson & Anning-Dorson, 2011). Many of these organizations, usually the USA in origin, operate in high value- added economic sectors, thus they strive to create pioneering high-commitment and high- performance in the workplace (Gunnigle, Lavelle, & McDonnell 2007). Therefore, it may well be that multinationals, particularly those from the USA, may have a greater propensity to diffuse innovative conflict

management policies as part of their overall strategy to create high-performance workplaces. There is less reason to posit that multinational companies from other countries will be amongst the ‘innovators’ in conflict management, given the strong association that can be found in the literature between US firms and pioneering initiatives in ADR.

This research seeks to find out what structures and policies exist in organisation to amiably resolve workplace disputes and the outcomes of these structures and policies. It also seeks to find out how well MNCs and domestic companies are adapting new techniques in place of the conventional methods. Additionally, this work seeks to add to knowledge the need for a wide range of critical changes in conflict management which is often tagged ‘one size fits all approach’ landscape of litigation in most organisations, and bring to bear new strategies of dispute resolution mechanisms for people management in Ghana.

   Research Objectives

1. To assess the availability and practice of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as HRM practices for resolving conflict in Ghanaian organisations.
   1. To assess the viability of the conventional conflict resolution mechanisms in Ghanaian organisations.
   1. To ascertain the outcomes of ADR mechanisms in both domestic and MNCs in Ghana. 4.To find out the similarities and divergence of ADR mechanisms in domestic and MNCs in Ghana.