CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
In the early 1900’s, conflict was seen as an indicator of poor organizational management which needed to be avoided, in the mid 1950’s, it was accepted passively and perceived as normal and expected; manager focused on resolving conflict, while in the 1970’s, conflict was viewed necessary as not good or bad but could be used to promote growth, in the 1990’s, managers needed to confront and manage conflict appropriately (Algert and Watson, 2002). Organisational conflict has historically been viewed as unpleasant, undesirable, something to be avoided by all and sundry (Oseremen and Osemeke, 2015).
Perceptions about conflict changed with the emergence of social systems and open system theory. According to the social system theories, conflict is one of the central forms of interaction. Conflict is normal and positive as well as negative. This view was supported by Emile Durkheim that conflict is normal and functional because it brings about positive changes in an organization. Conflict, however, becomes negative if it is not managed and allows reaching a dysfunctional stage (Ajike, Akinlabi and Magaji, 2015).
When people work and interact together, things do not always turn the way people want it to be. There are always misunderstandings and things do not always go smoothly. Indeed, conflict is an inevitable element of relationships in organizations. Conflict is a natural occurrence in all businesses, may it be a small organization or a big corporation. What makes them only different is how management views and addresses conflicts in their respective organizations (Garcia, 2013).
The role of conflict management in the life of an organization cannot be overemphasized. The establishment and continuous existence of organisation through the realization of its set goals and objectives requires the continuous and effective functioning of its material input with the human element being indispensable. However, the human elements required to facilitate goals attainment often engage in disagreement and variance over factors such as interest, views, style of management among others. The reactionary effect is due to the perceived incompatibilities resulting typically from some form of interference or opposition is term conflict (Obasan, 2011;Mughal and Khan, 2013).