The dynamics of conflicts within a multicultural organization: A qualitative study of conflicts that arise between employees and within two departments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to find out why different types of conflicts appear within an organizational context and what is causing the different types of conflicts within the organization and among the employees. This study builds on a collaboration with the NATO Airlift Management Program (NAMP) HR department. Qualitative methods have been used to illustrate that the research topic and the empirical data in the study is provided by personnel associated with two departments within the organization, the NAMP and the HAW (Heavy Airlift Wing). The study is based on a total of two focus group interviews, one employee satisfaction survey, three group discussions and field notes. Grounded theory has been used as method and analysis.\n\nThe findings show several dynamics, creating different patterns of conflicts within the organization and among the employees. The analysis identifies four key categories that affect the organization and the employees creating different patterns of conflicts. These were expectations among the employees, organizational change, multicultural work environment and management. The findings suggest that it is possible to assume that the different categories are strengthening each other, leading to the different patterns of the conflicts within each category, mainly since these dynamic processes are intertwined.\n\nIt seems that some of the conflicts that appear within the organization and among the employees are very conceptual and therefore are practically unavoidable. In any organization where more than one employee has to work with others conflicts will appear to a certain interpersonal level. Then there are other conflicts that are much more context-specific, where you can work on accommodate them and easier make the conditions better. The analysis suggests that the only category where it is most likely to introduce measures to make changes in times of conflicts is within the leadership, mainly because the leadership is the only one of the categories that carries a significant human factor. For future research, it may be interesting to examine more concrete examples that seem to promote and inhibit the dynamics of conflicts within the multicultural organization and among its employees.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".