Hello, I need help with completing this Group Discussions. I need to response to these two students regarding this case study. Please c attached. Thanks.

7-1 Discussion: Addressing Conflict With Communication

Discussion Topic

Analyze one of the conflicts described in the "Conflict at Mehra, Jindal and Associates" case study.

In your response posts, assume the role of another individual involved in the situations your peers analyzed and describe how you would have reacted to both the situation as outlined in the article and to your peers' communications.

STUDENT 1

For this week’s discussion, I will view the miscommunication from Shikha’s perspective. After reading Shikha’s background, it’s clear that she (as well as Mitali) is a hard worker, dependable, and good at what she does. This does not mean she is a good manager, though. She was absent for most of the conflicts between Ankit and Mitali due to her traveling to London. By the time Shikha returns from London, the conflicts between Ankit and Mitali have escalated creating a toxic work environment.

Shikha first met Ankit during his interview. It was common practice at this firm for individuals to be interviewed three times, with their third time being interviewed by the partners. Shikha brought up points during Ankit’s interview that left him feeling “a renewed enthusiasm for working in the legal field” (Hajela & Hajela, 2015, p. 4). This was actually great communication on Shikha’s part – as managers, we want our employees to look forward to working and finding a love for what they do. However, things only got worse once Ankit started with the firm.

During Ankit’s first day on the job, he was called into Shikha’s office only to leave feeling uncomfortable and unsure what the meeting was about. For starters, Shikha and Mitali looked up after Ankit was called into her office as if he was interrupting them. They didn’t even open the conversation with him. Being that it was Shikha’s office, she should’ve opened the conversation. Shikha refers to Ankit as “boy” which isn’t how anyone in the workplace should be addressed. If she didn’t remember his name, she could have asked him.

Then Shikha goes on about how she doesn’t have time because of her current workload and preparing to leave for London. Being a partner, it’s understandable she’s busy; however, she should still set aside time for employees. I’m sure she could spare 5 minutes to have a proper introductory meeting with a new staff member. She asks Mitali to assign Ankit work, and to double check it because she doesn’t “have the time to read trash and redo it” (Hajela & Hajela, 2015, p. 5). The way this conversation could’ve gone smoother is for Shikha to explain to Ankit that Mitali will be assigning him work. As he is a new member of the team, his work will be checked by Mitali to ensure it is up to the company’s standards.

Also, Ankit was called into Shikha’s office, yet most of the conversation is between Shikha and Mitali. Why was Ankit called into her office? A lot of the conversation between the two of them could’ve been conducted without Ankit present. It isn’t discussed at this point what exactly is expected of Ankit. “When people don’t find out what is expected of them until they run into a wall, go down the wrong road, or fail to get a promotion or pay raise, it’s too late. In these kinds of situations, people may experience a range of emotions from disappointment to betrayal” (Cardon, 2021, p. 273).

When Shikha returned, Ankit met with her to discuss his concerns. “Although Shikha did not say much, she listened patiently to what he had to say” (Hajela & Hajela, 2015, p. 9). The fact that she listened patiently is what an effective manager should do. The way she could’ve improved this meeting, though, is by explaining exactly what the next steps would be. Instead, she just said she would look into it. By letting him know how she intended to handle the situation, he would know exactly what to expect. Instead, there was a final incident as a result of Ankit feeling purposely left out of that week’s work assignments. Also, Shikha could’ve sent Ankit a follow-up email letting him know where things stood.

STUDENT 2

There were many issues within the case study that led to the many conflicts between Ankit and Mitali. One of the main issues especially with Mitali was the lack of communication as well as the communication style when she did speak with Ankit. She also lacked the listening skills that are needed for an effective conversation.

If I were to assume the role of Mitali, the first thing that I would adjust is my listening ability. During the interview process, Mitali did not let Ankit complete his thought in regards to where he would like to see his career path go. She interrupted him and told him what she thought he wanted to hear. When people in business fail to hear and understand each other, these mistakes are compounded and can have some costly results and some inefficiencies in business (Nichols and Stevens, 1957). Studies have shown that the average person listens with only 25% efficiency which can be a very costly skill not to perfect (Kaplan, 2018). This certainly came into play with the discussion of Ankit’s salary. The salary discussion may have been one that I would have had to further discuss with HR to ensure we were within his offer letter. Letting Ankit know that I would look into it further would at least show that I was seeing what I could do.

Mitali lacked the necessary communication skills when talking to Ankit. It appeared that she wanted to make her authority and position known in the workplace. She did not entertain Ankit’s feelings nor did she feel that she needed to address situations with him. When employees feel that their employer doesn’t value them and their abilities, they begin to lose interest in their work. If I were Mitali I would have acknowledged the way that Ankit felt and I would give him the opportunity to speak. If I didn’t have time for him right then in there, I would have informed him of this, but I also would have followed up with a meeting request so that these issues could be discussed. Apparently after the first conversation, the issue did not get resolved to Ankit’s satisfaction that he needed to go back. This could have been avoided if Mitali took the time to have a meaningful conversation with Ankit explaining why he was receiving the work he was in more depth and discussed the future further. As a manager, you cannot dismiss your employees and expect them to perform.