Group dynamics, according to Myers (2019), include the intangible behavioural forces that are presumed to have a major impact on the actions of individual team members but which team members themselves are often unable to recognize or control. It’s the dynamics within a team that decide how well they’ll do at accomplishing their goals. In 1965, Bruce Tuckman devised a model widely utilized to describe different aspects of group dynamics from formation to dissolution: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning (Chapman, 2021).

Forming: Individuals work together and put in their best efforts to create an upbeat, cheerful, and respectful environment (Chapman, 2021). Line managers will need to provide substantial advice, as not all duties will have been determined at the outset.

Storming: Disagreements and conflicts break out as boundaries are disputed. When team members are working toward a goal and feeling like they not making any headway, seeking out advice from the line manager might help immensely (Chad, 2013).

Norming: Members of the team begin to put their differences aside, recognize and value one another’s contributions, and show respect for the leader’s position (Chad, 2013). There will be overlap between the forming and storming stages when additional tasks need to be taken on.

 Performing: The team’s effort is clearly visible. When members of a team feel comfortable delegating to one another, their manager is more likely to assign more responsibility. Most issues are either avoided or resolved as soon as they arise (Chapman, 2021).

Adjourning: After a project has been finished, the team should celebrate their success. Uncertainty for individuals on the team might result from a lack of group structure after extended periods of hard effort (Chad, 2013).

My company’s experience building a virtual team in response to the COVID-19 epidemic and the resulting requirement for business continuity provide a striking example of these phases in action. HR was crucial in helping my company build a virtual team by pointing people in the right path. As time went on, factions formed within the wider team effort, driven by established personal ties and bonds. During this time period, HR played a crucial role in fostering an atmosphere of cross-departmental cooperation and information sharing as well as improving performance feedback and rules for employee involvement for the virtual team effort. When the virtual team finally reached the norming phase, HR noticed a big improvement in the team’s ability to achieve decisions through group consensus. Over time, the team demonstrated increased independence; while differences of opinion persisted about how to address issues like work hours and methods of communication, these were ultimately settled with minimal involvement from HR and upper management. When the team purpose was accomplished, it was disbanded.

Conflict resolution methods within an HR context

Due to the collaborative nature of most business tasks, personality clashes among employees are inevitable. Management, human resources, and employees all need to be equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to deal with conflict in the workplace (CIPD, 2020). Dispute resolution methods include, for instance, the negotiating approach developed by Fisher and Ury and the compromise conflict resolution approach. Taking a hypothetical scenario in an organisation where a male and female employee gets into a heated dispute. According to the female employee, the male employee, who is in supervisory position, always disregards her contribution to ideas, and always interrupts when she tries to put her ideas across. The female feels she gets this kind of treatment because she is a woman as it does not happen to other male colleagues.

The Compromising Conflict Resolution Approach

The Thomas-Kilmann concept of compromising conflict resolution includes having a conversation about the situation in question between the conflicting parties (Kilmann, 2019). Any attempt at amicable resolution of a disagreement depends on the dedication and cooperation of the warring parties (Day, 2019). Ideally, the parties involved in the conflict would talk things over and come to an understanding about how to end the conflict once and for all.

Applying the compromising conflict resolution approach, both party’s perspective must be placed into contribution. Hoping that each party is willing to resolve the issue, some underlying issues I may uncover is that the male may have had a hard time taking the female’s input as it was the first time placing a woman on the team and this might be impacting his judgement. A solid ground can be established by allowing the female to explain some of her contributions and the supervisor offering a listening ear and offering honest feedback without bias.

Fisher and Ury’s Negotiation Method

Fisher and Ury agree that in order to find a workable resolution, it is necessary to take into account all of the factors contributing to the disagreement. Fisher and Ury provide context-specific negotiation guidelines that can be applied as appropriate to the type of conflict at hand (Verhun and Cherneha, 2021). Taking the personalities out of the equation, putting interests ahead of positions, coming up with creative solutions that benefit everyone involved, and using objective negotiation criteria are all essential steps.

Using Fisher’s and Ury’s approach to solve the same issue, then first I will have both parties together in a room where each party can openly communicate their concern in an engaging manner. Together we can then assess how the supervisor’s behaviour may impact the workplace environment not just for the female employee but other employees as well. Then we can all look at actionable measures instead of focusing judgment considering a solution that will have a mutual gain for both. Finally each individual would be expected to abide by the set conflict resolution guidelines presented.