Abstract
AbstractThe development of more remote sources of advice has been a notable feature of the contemporary human resource (HR) function. However, the consequences for the management of workplace conflict are largely ignored within the academic literature. This study draws on data from two qualitative studies, which examine the experiences of HR practitioners (HRPs), line managers and trade union representatives in handling and resolving conflict. It explores how different dimensions of organisational proximity shape the relationships between HRPs and other key stakeholders, and the impact of this on conflict management. The findings suggest that formal, risk averse approaches to conflict are not simply a result of geographical distance. Instead, functional specialisation has not only eroded cognitive and social proximity between HRPs, line managers and employee representatives but also within the HR function itself. This has triggered the reinforcement of bureaucratic control and embedded responses that emphasise compliance rather than resolution.
Highlights
The erosion of collective employment relations over the last 2 decades has been reflected in changing patterns of workplace conflict and the increased incidence of individual employment disputes (Dix, Forth, & Sisson, 2009)
The study poses three specific questions: What impact does proximity have on relationships between human resource practitioner (HRP), line managers and employee representatives? What are the implications of different human resource (HR) structures for dimensions of proximity? To what extent can the concept of proximity explain the resilience of formal approaches to conflict management? Overall, the findings suggest that formalised, risk‐averse responses to conflict are not a result of more remote HR
This study has explored the relationship between organisational proximity and the management of workplace conflict
Summary
The erosion of collective employment relations over the last 2 decades has been reflected in changing patterns of workplace conflict and the increased incidence of individual employment disputes (Dix, Forth, & Sisson, 2009). The initial response of policymakers and practitioners to this centred on the extension of workplace procedures to ensure consistency and legal compliance. The perceived burden of formal process and the sustained threat of litigation has led to more informal approaches and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) (Currie, Gormley, Roche, & Teague, 2017; Gibbons, 2007). Despite their increasing responsibility for informal resolution and the management of disputes procedures, line managers and their more senior colleagues often lack the skills and confidence to manage conflict (Teague & Roche, 2012). The importance of early intervention and informal resolution has become embedded in the discourse of HR practitioners (HRPs) (Saundry et al, 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
