Conflict and Crisis Management: A Theoretical Comparison

This study conceptually took a comparative overview of conflict and crisis phenomena as it relates to the current state of business operating environment which is riddled with so many threats and uncertainties. In doing this, extant reviews were made on the two variables in order to demystify the controversies surrounding their manifestations and impacts on the organization. Consequently, we discovered that both conflict and crisis phenomena are indispensable part of human existence and environmental character. The comparative analysis explored revealed that both phenomena impact on the organization negatively but at varied degrees. Crises are mainly associated with disaster and hazard that ruthlessly negates the functionality of the organization where urgent response is not taken to mitigate it. While this goes, conflict is not completely a dangerous phenomenon in its entirety as people superficially perceive it to be. It is like a coin with two sides, the head and the tail; where the head represents success and the tail represents failure. The functional (head) aspect impacts on the organization positively while the dysfunctional (tail) aspect leaves the organization with negative and destructive consequences just like crisis. Therefore, we conclude that both conflict and crisis are inherent phenomena among people and their environments which cannot be eradicated but managed through the adoption of context-fit strategies. In this regards, we recommend that: i) in the face of conflict and crisis, the choice of management approach should mainly be guided by its type, level and phase ii) since conflict and crisis are endemic factors, managers should regularly carry out both internal and external diagnosis as a means of identifying early warning signs of disruptive conflicts and natural crisis’s incubation periods and possible manifestation time so as to provide adequate proactive and reactive response strategies timely. Keywords: Conflict, crisis, management, compromise, forcing, collaboration, proactive-ness, reactiveness, comparative analysis DOI: 10.7176/EJBM/12-2-03 Publication date: January 31st 202