Third Party Conflict Resolution

In this paper, Team C will analyze the intervention and mediation strategy. Team C will define mediation and elaborate on how one can define this strategy is the best strategy to use when trying to solve company disputes between individuals and explain why people use it to solve conflicts. If mediation does not solve the problem, Team C will create and describe a contingency plan for conflict. Mediation is the process of intervening for bringing about a settlement (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2006). Once conflict occurs, each party should focus so that he or she can reach an agreement.

Intervention Strategies

During negotiations, management, and those in authority should intervene in conflicts and disputes as third-parties. The authors designed this case study to explore disputes and conflict intervention of mediation strategies renowned by management in the responsibility of third-party conflict resolution. The purpose is to practice a successful approach using potential mediation intervention strategies.

During the mediation intervention, the manager Joe should listen to both side's argument and position regarding the plant and decide the proper solution. Charles, the plant worker must trust Joe's judgment and live with his decision. Nevertheless, management should have good reasons for making the indispensable changes within the plant. One would prefer the (MCS) means-control strategy as the intervention strategy in this managerial dispute. The means-control strategy reveals that management intervenes in the conflict by influencing the process of resolution (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2006). In this exercise, management, recognized as the mediator enforced the rules and made the final decision according to the control that management hold. Management intervened in the conflict by controlling the process. As a result of this, the company used arbitration by taking complete control and by deciding what and how to present the information and outcome for the company (Lewicki, Saunders, & Barry, 2006).

Best Strategy

Team C strongly believes that mediation would be the most useful strategy for conflict resolution in this case. Such approach suggests that there is a means-control strategy that facilitates communication between the other two conflicting parties. Throughout this communication, the neutral side helps the parties involved to focus on the issues at hand, assists in generating common grounds that satisfies the interests involved. Consequently, two conflicting parties reach an agreement to benefit both.

In the case of conflict between Joe and Charles, the senior vice president of operations and chief operating officer would act as the mediator. The substantial experience in the company and close relationship with Joe and Charles, the initial step of gaining trust and respect of other parties involved needed toward conflict resolution is already achieved. The next step would involve removing the communication barriers and let Joe and Charles listen to each other's point of view. Throughout this communication, the conversation would have to regulate and remind them to stay calm and focus on the issues at hand but never take anybody's side.

As a result of such conversation, problems that arose between Joe and Charles would be clear; the senior vice president would summarize parties' agreements and disagreements. Therefore, help both parties consider the alternatives offered and let them agree on which path to pursue. The last step would involve a summary of the problems, specifics of the agreement and how this agreement would be achieved to avoid future conflict.

Therefore, mediation strategy can resolve conflict between Joe and Charles as it gives conflicting parties a chance to communicate with one another and decide between alternatives each person offered. As a result because the conflicting parties agree upon a plan, which is mutually beneficial, the conflict may be resolve. Moreover, the conflict is not further fueled because of the presence of the third party that does not take either side and serves as a mediator in the dispute.

Resolving the Conflict

Joe Gibbons and Charles Stewart should resolve the conflict with communication, which consist of good ethics on Joe's behalf and logic on Charles part. Joe needs to mentor Charles for the remaining year with his leadership skills and knowledge. The conflict started when Joe was in the process of completing his five-year plan without implementing the thoughts of his assistant. Joe does not believe Charles is competent enough to do the job himself. Joe does not want to share his ideas with Charles. Joe and Charles can resolve the conflict in two ways. The first way is for Joe to communicate with Charles about his five-year plan before retirement. Management believes Charles is a bright and motivated employee with brilliant