Abstract
Over the last three decades there has been a radical shift in the regulatory framework dealing with formal manifestations of workplace conflict in the UK. Legal structures that supported collective industrial action have been weakened and replaced with a system that allows individuals to pursue enforcement of employment rights through litigation, via employment tribunals (ETs). Current debate often focuses on the costs of the ET system for the workers involved, in particular its implications for business performance and public expenditure (De Dreu 2008; OPP 2008; CIPD 2011; Gallie et al. 2013; Mangan 2013). Policymakers and academics consistently ask how we can best manage workplace conflict in order to prevent escalation to the ET process, and this area has accordingly seen various policy changes to rectify perceived problems following the publication of the Gibbons Review in 2007.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Figures from Understanding Society, in Buscha, F., Latreille, P. and Urwin, P. (2013), Charging Fees in Employment Tribunals, commissioned by the Trades Union Congress.
- 2.
- 3.
This chapter is for a non-specialist audience, so we attempt to avoid technical language. When we speak of a ‘statistically insignificant’ impact, we refer to the situation where we are unable to reject the null hypothesis of parameter insignificance. When we suggest a ‘statistically significant’ impact, we refer to the situation where we are able to reject the null hypothesis of parameter insignificance – in both cases we use language that is more accessible to non-technical readers.
- 4.
The question of resolution necessitates a focus on a specific case of conflict. Thus, for the minority who reported more than one case of conflict in the previous year, each respondent was asked to identify ‘the most serious problem (e.g. with the greatest consequences for those affected or the organization)’ and to focus on this case for these questions.
- 5.
Specific figures are: 17 % of employees indicated that the conflict was ‘fully resolved’, 21 % ‘largely but not fully resolved’, 19 % ‘partly resolved’, 22 % ‘mainly not resolved’ and 20 % ‘not at all resolved’ (n = 750).
References
Behfar, K., Mannix, E., & Peterson, R. (2011). Conflict in small groups: The meaning and consequences of process conflict. Small Group Research, 42(2), 127–176.
British Chambers of Commerce (2011). The workforce survey – Small businesses, October 2011. London: British Chambers of Commerce.
CBI. (2011). Settling the matter – Building a more effective and efficient tribunal system, April.
CIPD. (2011). Conflict management – Survey report. London: CIPD.
CIPD. (2012). Employee outlook: Spring 2012. London: CIPD.
CIPD. (2015). Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees. Survey report, April. London: CIPD.
De Dreu, C. (2008). The virtue and vice of workplace conflict: Food for (pessimistic) thought. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 29, 5–18.
Edwards, P., Ram, M., & Black, J. (2004). Why does employment legislation not damage small firms? Journal of Law and Society, 31(2), 245–265.
Fevre, R., Nichols, T., Prior, G., & Rutherford, I. (2009). Fair treatment at work report: Findings from the 2008 Survey. Employment Relations Research Series No.103, Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR).
Fevre, R., Lewis, D., & Robinson, A. (2012). Trouble at work. London: Bloomsbury.
Forth, J., Bewley, H., & Bryson, A. (2006) Small and medium sized enterprises: Findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. London: Department of Trade and Industry.
Gallie, D., Felstead, A., Green, F., & Inanc, H. (2013). Fear at work in Britain – First findings from the skills and employment survey, 2012. London: Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies, Institute of Education.
Gibbons, M. (2007). A review of employment dispute resolution in Great Britain. London: DTI.
Harris, L., Tuckman, A., & Snook, J. (2008). Small firms and workplace disputes resolution. Acas Research Papers, 01/08.
Jehn, K., & Mannix, E. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251.
Jones, C., & Saundry, R. (2012). The practice of discipline: Evaluating the roles and relationship between managers and HR professionals. Human Resource Management Journal, 22(3), 252–266.
Jordan, E., Thomas, A., Kitching, J., & Blackburn, R. (2013). Employment regulation – Part A: Employer perceptions and the impact of employment regulation. Employment Relations Research Series, 123, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
Knight, K. G., & Latreille, P. L. (2000). Discipline, dismissals and complaints to employment tribunals. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(4), 533–555.
Latreille, P. L. (2011). Workplace mediation: A thematic review of the Acas/CIPD evidence. Acas Research Papers, 13/11.
Latreille, P., & Saundry, R. (2015). Employment rights and industrial policy. In D. Bailey, K. Cowling, & P. Tomlinson (Eds.), New perspectives on industrial policy for a modern Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, C. (2015). How to master workplace and employment mediation. Haywards Heath: Bloomsbury.
Lucy, D., & Broughton, A. (2011). Understanding the behaviour and decision making of employees in conflicts and disputes at work. Employment Relations Research Series No. 119. Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR).
Mangan, D. (2013). Employment tribunal reforms to Boost the Economy. Industrial Law Journal, 42(4)), 409–421.
OPP (2008). Fight, flight or face it – Celebrating the effective management of conflict at work. Oxford: OPP.
Runde, C. E.,., & Flanagan, T. A. (2007). Becoming a conflict competent leader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Saridakis, G., Sen-Gupta, S., Edwards, P., & Storey, D. (2008). The impact of enterprise size on employment tribunal incidence and outcomes: Evidence from Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 46(3), 469–499.
Saundry, R., & Wibberley, G. (2012). Mediation and early resolution – A case study in conflict management. Acas Research Papers, 12/12.
Saundry, R., Latreille, P., Dickens, L., Irvine, C., Teague, P., Urwin, P., & Wibberley, G. (2014). Reframing resolution – Managing conflict and resolving individual employment disputes in the contemporary workplace, Acas Policy Paper.
Saundry, R., & Wibberley, G. (2014). Workplace dispute resolution and the management of individual conflict —A thematic analysis of five case studies. Acas Research Papers, 06/14.
Urwin, P. (2011). Self-employment, small firms and enterprise. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Urwin, P., & Buscha, F. (2012). Back to work: the role of small businesses in employment and enterprise. Blackpool: Federation of Small Businesses.
Wood, S., Saundry, R., & Latreille, P. (2014). Analysis of the nature, extent and impact of grievance and disciplinary procedures and workplace mediation using WERS2011. Acas Research Papers, 10/14.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gifford, J., Gould, M., Latreille, P., Urwin, P. (2016). Workplace Conflict: Who, Where, When, and Why?. In: Saundry, R., Latreille, P., Ashman, I. (eds) Reframing Resolution. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51560-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51560-5_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-51559-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-51560-5
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)