The VidSoft triangle case deals with one of the broad-based challenges facing organizations as result of the insisting need to respond globalization through working with people from different cultures (managing multicultural team).
The VidSoft triangle case deals also with the “relationship conflict “ which is –as studies demonstrated- almost always dysfunctional and probably ends up with hindering the completion of organizational tasks.
The VidSoft triangle case also reflects one important contemporary theory of motivation which is the goal-setting theory applied through its main tool ;management by objective program “MBO”.
The VidSoft triangle case provides an ideal of the integration between both variable-pay program and employees recognition program that resulted in a highly satisfied staff.
The VidSoft triangle case also reflects one kind of transactional leader illustrated in James white’s no-nonsense approach to management and another kind of charismatic leader illustrated in Keith Nash personality and management style.
First: Managing Multicultural Team:
Despite their common descent, Hsu and LI grew up in completely different cultures. Hsu grew up in California where the individualistic background dominates, while Li grew up in Hong Kong where the collective background dominates. Given her collective background, Li excelled in terms of organizational citizenship behavior “OCB” by helping everyone in her team succeed which is not a part of her formal job requirement .As a result, she was awarded the best team player award for two consecutive quarters, and when promoted, everyone in the team loved the idea and she got a resounding round of approval. On the contrary, Hsu’s individualistic background created an obstacle in terms of his ability to work within a team and to participate in group’s nonwork-related events. What’s more, Babatunde’s trials failed to turn him around ,then he sought to move to the other group where the group superintended is absent and the requirement for participation in team-related activity expected to be at its minimum with the absence of leadership roles. Moreover, he will not be required to provide feedback to a lower level manager that he personally doesn’t like.
Second: Relationship Conflict:
Listing all his personal nonwork-related reasons for not accepting Li as a direct manager ,Hsu focused on a kind of relationship conflict based on the definition of the interactionist view of conflict, that brew to the fourth stage in the conflict process-behavior.
VidSoft Conflict Process:
Stage I:Potential opposition or incompatibility
The existence of personal differences between Hsu and Li acted as a potential source for creating conflict, given that all reasons he reported to Babatunde were nonwork-related. Hsu mentioned that he didn’t respect Li and could not respect her due to her poor technical background. Also, he complimented Babatunde management style. Finally, he expressed his frustration resulted from Li being inexperienced at managing people-he didn’t mention one task-related reason. Stage II: Cognition and Personalization
Conflict now is perceived by Hsu. His perception ,as one of the conflicting parties, is very important to define the conflict issue. Stage III: Intentions
Given his individualistic background ,Hsu chose competing as a conflict handling intention. He sought his own satisfaction neglecting Li’s interests and the future impact of his intention on the overall group interests knowing that, No else except Hsu had come forward to complain from the same. Stage IV: Behavior
In this stage the conflict between Hsu and Li becomes visible and three-way meetings were held to resolve. Despite their several meetings over two weeks, neither party wanted to budge. Stage IV represents the last stage where the VidSoft case paused at, waiting Babatunde’s decision. Stage V: Outcomes
As a relationship conflict; most...