Case Study: Management Conflict and Effective Negotiation

Introduction

As the project manager, Mr. Paul Curran, this paper will provide an analysis of the conflict in the Scottish Parliament Project to ascertain the strained relationship between the project sponsor, Mrs. Doig, and the former project manager, Mr. Armstrong. The analysis will identify the conflicts, the type of conflicts and their causes within the project team and come up with a negotiation between the project manager, Paul Curran and the project sponsor to address issues faced when working with Mr. Armstrong.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Background

Based on the analysis, Paul Curran was the project manager between January, 17th 1999 and January 2002, the Senior Project Manager between January 2002 and June 2004. Paul Curran was also the project director from June 21st, 2004 until the project completion. In spring 1999, the architects have submitted an incomplete stage 2 of the project for designs. There are also no cost estimations and the brief has also not been revised. Stage 2 entails the concept design.

Based on the RIBA Plan of Works (2013), stage 2 is the concept design phase of a project. The concept design requires the project manager to outline proposals for the structural design, the building services systems, specifications, and preliminary cost details. The project manager also has the duty to provide relevant project strategies according to the design program. It is also the responsibility of the project manager to agree to any alterations to the brief and issue the final project brief.

The project sponsor, Mrs. Doig was informed by Paul Curran and is aware of the challenges in the progress of the project where severe delays are imminent. The project managers' views to the employer are right and there is a need for ensuring that the project managers' function is not by-passed, the decisions are not made between the client and the architect. It is also necessary for the project manager to technically scrutinize the designs. The continued decision making of the architects and clients with Enric Miralles puts the project manager in a limited position to execute the given responsibility and power in managing the design process.

The Strained Relationship between the Project Sponsor, and the Former Project Manager

Mrs. Doig, the project sponsor and Mr. Armstrong, the former project manager who preceded Paul Curran have a strained relationship because Mr. Armstrong could not provide a complete concept design in time. Armstrong had communication problems with the consultants and could interfere with their responsibilities to advise the company accordingly. The communication problems resulted to delays in project delivery in stage C. The previous project manager uses power over consultants who resign from their work and considers the architects as having the capacity to deliver the concept design on time. The project sponsor is concerned with the steps Mr. Armstrong was undertaking and demanded that the project manager and the architects as replaceable. However, Mr. Armstrong sees otherwise that the two cannot be replaced at the concept design stage.

The inflexibility of the previous project manager puts the project sponsor in dilemma regarding the funding of the project since there are no cost estimates and the concept design is late. Based on the project facts, Mrs. Doig is worried about the funds getting lost if the project is stopped. The feasibility of the project from the previous project manager is not conclusive. The project sponsor is not an expert in design and is concerned about not getting the required technical expertise from the previous project manager. Mr. Armstrong is an experienced architect and project manager and it is not clear to Mrs. Doig why he cannot come up with the accurate project concept design and cost estimates.

The Emergence of Conflict, Types of Conflict and Background of the Conflict

Emergence of Conflict

According to Ng, Pena-Mora, and Tamaki, (2007), behavioral differences cause common conflicts in a project. In the design phase, people tend to be the main sources of conflict as a result of misunderstandings, culture, language, unrealistic expectations, incompatible objectives, work habits, lack of team spirit and communication problems. Based on this explanation, the conflict between the previous project manager and project sponsor emerges from unrealistic expectations, work habits, communication problems and a lack of team spirit. The project manager was not willing to involve Mrs. Doig in the decision-making of the project design and costs. During the concept design, the project manager work habits were not appealing to the project sponsor. Mr. Armstrong was not ready to provide the required information to the project sponsor. On the other hand, Mrs. Doig was not ready to accept the incomplete details about the concept design.

Stages of conflict: The conflict spiral is a useful framework that applies to this situation to explain how conflict arose. According to Bogaers (2009), a conflict takes four main stages to emerge. Sides are formed by the involved parties which harden the position. The people stop communicating when already resources are committed. The conflict moves outside the team whereby every involved gets a distorted perception of the issue which leads to a sense of crisis emerging. In the conflict between the previous project manager and project manager, the two had an initial communication about the project concept design. The project sponsor failed to communicate with the required parties in coming up with the complete concept design and the estimated costs. Mrs. Doig had already committed money to the project for it to begin. However, Mr. Armstrong provided incomplete information about the extra amount of funds that will be needed for the project. After reporting to the client, the Scottish Parliament, Mrs. Doig was not impressed by the incomplete information and sensed a crisis when the project had to be stopped when already funds have been committed. There was tension between the EMBT and RMJM and a decision to stop the project arrived until the issues were resolved. On the side of Mrs. Doig, it meant that funds would be lost when the project is stopped at stage C.

Types of Conflict

As stated earlier, the conflict between Mrs. Doig and Mr. Armstrong resulted from the delays of the concept design. Based on the project facts, the concept design in 1998 was already delayed by four weeks. Cost increases are evident in stages 2 and 3 of the project and that was one of the causes of the conflict. The design development delays were occurring after the contracts have already been awarded by the project sponsor who had limited information about the concept costs and concept design.

Communication difficulties between the members of the project team caused the delay. In the design stage, conflicts arise because of not involving all the concerned parties in advance enough (Whetten & Cameron, 2011). The project managers fail to communicate necessary information and this causes that design team and the client to disagree on different aspects of the design. The types of conflicts related to the issue are functional and interpersonal conflicts. A functional conflict occurs when there is a disagreement on ways of achieving a goal (Saee, 2007). Resolving this type of conflict leads to innovation and emergence of idea creativity in the project implementation process. At the design stage, the functional conflict is at a medium level and the likelihood of it being concealed to become dysfunctional conflict at a later stage is high/medium (Gardiner & Simmons, 1995).

The conflict is also interpersonal since one of the parties involves feels that the other is frustrating the efforts to arrive at the end goals of the project. An interpersonal conflict is when an individual or a group of people tends to interfere with the efforts of another person in attaining a goal (Whetten & Cameron, 2011). Based on the behavior of Mr. Armstrong, the project manager is frustrating the efforts of Mrs. Doig who is willing to support the project until it is complete. Mrs. Doig is against the idea of stopping the project because Mr. Armstrong could not provide a complete concept design and estimated costs. Mrs. Doig is angered by the behavior of Mr. Armstrong and feels that it is possible to replace the architect and the project manager at stage C.

Negotiation Between Paul Curran and the Project Sponsor

To ensure the problems faced by Mrs. Doig with Mr. Amstrong is not repeated, a negotiation is critical between the Paul Curran and Mrs. Doig. The issues and their true priorities for consideration in this negotiation for Paul Curran will include creativity, consensus-seeking, sharing information consistently, openness and participation of all involved parties. The true priorities for these issues are negotiable.

The issues and their true priorities for Mrs. Doig and the employer, Scottish Parliament will be minimal control of decision-making, involve third parties to resolve the conflict, willingness to accept solutions, willingness to understand viewpoints, and willingness to solve issues joints. The true priorities for these issues are neutral and negotiable at the same time.

The identification of the above issues was guided by the type of conflicts between the previous project manager and the project sponsor. From the analysis of the emergence of the conflict, it is evident that the two parties needed a way of resolving the problem of delays in the concept design and cost estimations. The priorities are based on the need for agreeing between the parties involved. Negotiation is a major priority for all the issues since effective negotiation requires a win-win deal design, unlocking the value of the project and setting up the right parties (Lax & Sebenius, 2014). The conflict would remain function if the parties to the negotiation approach the issues in the appropriate manner.

References

Bogaers, V. (2009). Managing conflict. Slide Share.

Gardiner, P., & Simmons, J. (1995). Case explorations in construction conflict management. Construction Management & Economics, 13(3).

Lax, D., & Sebenius, J. (2014). 3 D negotiation: Powerful tools to change the game in your most important deals. Harvard Business School Press.

Ng, H., Pena-Mora, F., & Tamaki, T. (2007). Dynamic conflict management in large-scale design and construction projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 23(2); 52-66.

RIBA Plan of Works 2013.

Saee, J. (2007). Effective strategies for conflict management. In Saee, J. (ed) Contemporary Global Strategy: global perspectives. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Whetten, D., & Cameron, K. (2011). Developing management skills. 8th edn. New Jersey, Pearson.