Mgmt443 Assignment 5 Individual Assignment 10 Points I Read

Mgmt443 Assignment 5 Individual Assignment 10 Points I Rea

Read the case “Why is Cooperation so Hard?” (Daft’s Organization Theory & Design, pp. 205). Analyze the organizational relationships, power dynamics, and interpersonal conflicts described, applying relevant organizational and management theories. Provide strategic recommendations for mid-level managers to foster collaboration between conflicting CEOs.

Paper For Above instruction

The case “Why is Cooperation so Hard?” highlights the complex interplay of power, independence, and interpersonal relationships within interorganizational collaborations. It explores how organizations and their leaders often struggle to balance independence with the need for cooperation, revealing underlying power dynamics and conflicts. In this analysis, I will identify which organization holds more influence, interpret the perspectives of the CEOs involved, and propose strategic interventions from a managerial perspective to promote partnership and reduce adversarial tendencies.

1. Power Dynamics in Interorganizational Relationships

In examining the case, it becomes evident that the organization with more influence is the one that possesses greater resources, strategic importance, or leverage over the other. Power in organizational relationships often hinges on control over critical resources, access to markets, or strategic alliances (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). If one organization can threaten to withdraw key supports, or can impose conditions that significantly impact the other’s operations, it exerts more power.

Based on the case details, the organization that appears more dominant is likely the one with better market positioning or greater resource availability. The justification stems from the concept of resource dependence theory, which states that organizations strive to minimize dependence on uncertain or weak partners (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). The more resource-rich or strategically vital organization naturally assumes a position of greater power, as the other becomes more dependent on it for essential outcomes.

Furthermore, the CEOs’ behaviors suggest an imbalance—where one might wield influence through their control of critical projects or market access—thereby shaping negotiations and interactions. Thus, power can be inferred based on resource control, strategic importance, and the ability to influence the other organization’s autonomy and success.

2. Perspectives of the CEOs: Armando Bronaldo and Audie Richards

Both CEOs perceive the relationship as uneven and perhaps exploitative, leading to feelings of being undervalued or mistreated. Armando Bronaldo’s frustrations may stem from feeling sidelined or constrained by the other organization’s demands or policies, which threaten his authority or strategic goals. According to organizational politics theory, this perception of being undervalued can breed resistance, mistrust, and a reluctance to cooperate (Pfeffer, 1981).

Conversely, Audie Richards likely perceives that Bronaldo’s counterpart is resistant to sharing information, resources, or decision-making authority—creating an adversarial environment. This perception aligns with the transaction cost perspective, which highlights how parties may feel that their investments in the relationship are not reciprocated or appreciated, leading to defensive behaviors (Williamson, 1985). Both CEOs’ dissatisfaction reflects underlying issues of perceived power imbalance, mistrust, and incompatible strategic priorities that hinder true collaboration.

3. Strategic Influence by Mid-Level Managers

As Victoria Santos and Larry Stansell, mid-level managers in this scenario, the challenge is to facilitate a shift from conflict to collaboration. A joint strategy should focus on creating common ground, fostering mutual understanding, and aligning goals. First, they should conduct a neutral assessment of each organization’s interests, constraints, and expectations—using tools like interest-based negotiation (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 2011).

Next, they could organize facilitated dialogue sessions that encourage open communication, emphasizing shared values and long-term benefits of partnership. Building trust is vital; therefore, small, low-stakes collaborative projects could serve as pilot initiatives to demonstrate the mutual gains of cooperation.

Furthermore, mid-level managers can serve as mediators and advocates for interest-based solutions, helping the CEOs see beyond immediate conflicts and recognize the strategic value of a partnership. They should also develop formal governance mechanisms—such as joint committees or liaison roles—that institutionalize cooperation and reduce the likelihood of unilateral maneuvers that foster mistrust.

Implementing these strategies requires patience, diplomatic skill, and persistence, but can ultimately lead to a change in relationship dynamics, transforming the adversarial relationship into a collaborative partnership beneficial for both organizations.

Conclusion

Power dynamics in organizations are complex and heavily reliant on resource control, strategic importance, and relational dependencies. The case demonstrates how perceptions of unfair treatment and imbalance can perpetuate conflict between CEOs. Mid-level managers play a crucial role in mediating these differences through strategic, interest-based approaches that foster trust, mutual understanding, and collaboration. Ultimately, organizations that adopt a relational, rather than purely transactional, perspective are more likely to cultivate sustainable cooperative relationships that enhance strategic flexibility and organizational resilience.

References

• Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin.
• Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in Organizations. Harvard University Press.
• Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Harper & Row.
• Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Free Press.
• Daft, R. L. (2015). Organization Theory & Design (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Thompson, L. (2009). The Truth About Negotiations. Pearson.
• Guanxi and Organizational Relationships: An Integrative Review. Journal of Business Ethics.
• Kolb, D. M., & McGinn, K. (2001). Managing Disputes through Mediation and Negotiation. Jossey-Bass.
• Deutsch, M. (2011). Cooperation and Competition. In The Handbook of Conflict Resolution (3rd ed.), Jossey-Bass.
• Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). The Manager as Negotiator. The Free Press.