In the video presentations, “Conflict
Resolution – Part 1” and “Conflict Resolution – Part 2”, presented by How to Relate
to People in Business (2008); herein referred to as How To, expected conflicts
and how to reach a negotiated agreement are presented. Conflict, according to
Whetten and Cameron (2011) “sparks creativity, stimulates innovation, and
encourages personal improvement” (p. 376). One of the primary keys, outlined in
the videos, is to turn from being an autocratic boss to one who persuades his
or her subordinates and other parties (How To, 2008, Part 1). Rather than
giving orders, which foster resentment, needs of followers need to be identified
and met through empathy, “listening to someone until you understand their point
of view and what motivates them”, asking subordinates for solutions, having
bosses submit recommendations, and implementing a final agreement (How To, 2008,
Part 1). It was in this context I was able to face and navigate negotiations as
an underwriter for American Pioneer Life Insurance.
I worked for American Pioneer
for a period of twelve years, which spanned the late 80s and early 90s. Our
primary method for communicating underwriting requirements to our agents in the
field was to complete a pre-printed, five-part NCR form. It listed the
underwriting requirements most often requested by underwriting. The idea was
simple. An underwriter checked off the items needed to assess the risk presented
by an insurance applicant, provided additional comments to the writing agent,
and then sent copies to the writing agent, overriding agents, and regional
managers. The problem that occurred was in order to use the NCR form, without
making copies for the file or additional hierarchies, the underwriter literally
had to exert enough pressure on the pen so that a clear carbon copy appeared
through all five parts. This problem trickled down to the underwriting assistants
as they were tasked with making copies for not only the files; they had to
secure sufficient copies to mail to the managing agents. Often times,
assistants stood at the Xerox machine for long stints of time. This caused
workers from other departments to have to delay their own copy needs. Bottle
necks were the norm in the Xerox room. Another problem presented by the NCR
forms was that of legibility. Not every underwriter demonstrated excellent
penmanship. As such, field agents often called the office to have instructions
and/or comments interpreted by the assistants. Translating files pulled
assistants away from other duties. I had been an underwriting assistant before
climbing the organizational ladder to become an underwriter. I remember having
to interpret various handwritings. The conflict was quite clear. How do we develop
a process that alleviates the Xerox line, provides clear communication to the
field, and still provides a streamlined method for underwriters to list
underwriting requirements in each file? It was the answer that required information
gathering, negotiation, implementation, and feedback (How To, 2008, Part 1).
My role was simple. As an
underwriter, I knew each underwriter had a unique handwriting. Although the NCR
form had most of the requirements pre-printed; it was often necessary to write
out additional requirements. Underwriters did not have typewriters; but, the
assistance did. More importantly, they had computers
that could be linked to the new word processing capabilities offered by data
processing. Expecting assistants to roll each NCR form into the typewriter
and type each note individually would cause substantial work-flow delays. We
needed a uniform and expeditious manner that would provide a simple method for
the underwriters and a typed method for the assistants. During the early 90s,
word processors were in their infancy; yet, our data processing department had
begun to experiment with an extended word processing capability. I brought this
development to the attention of my boss, the vice-president of underwriting. He
was old-school, in that he preferred hand-writing requirements to agents;
however, I was able to persuade him to listen to my idea.
I took one of our NCR forms and
sat down with the director of data processing. I explained to him the bulk of
the wording for each requirement did not change. His word processing expansion
looked to incorporate the use of five variable codes that when entered would
print a pre-defined message. Our NCR form always included a paramedical
examination along with the reason for it request. A code, such as PMD01, would
indicate a paramedical examination was required based on the amount of
insurance requested. By assigning specific codes to each requirement and
allowing for the input of additional comments, underwriters were able to enter
a code on the file worksheet, list additional comments on the file worksheet,
send the file to the assistant, and have the assistant print a five part word
processor form. When tested, there were technical difficulties at first; but,
minor adjustments solved the problems. The real test was presenting this to the
underwriters, assistants, and the regional managers for our agency force.
As demonstrated in the second
video (How To, 2008, Part 2), plans often times require revisions; and, my plan
was not any different. When the boss called for a discussion and allowed me to
present to proposed solution, empathy was required so that I could understand
the concerns of all parties (How To, 2008, Part 1). A main concern was that of the
existing worksheet, a part of the permanent file. It did not mirror either the
codes or word processing product; thus, confusion was born. Managing agents
observed the new forms did not list copy addresses as verification that
managers had been copied on outstanding underwriting requirements. Those who
preferred to write out requirements struggled with the new codes; but, were
willing to make their own cheat sheets in order to provide better communication
to the field agents. As I recall, we had only three meetings in total, with all
parties, before reaching our final product. It was a welcomed change that
decreased delays caused by Xerox lines, reduced our budget, as NCR forms were
quite costly, and it promoted the use of new word processor technologies. The
decision was not forced and neither was the conflict avoided (Whetten &
Cameron, 2011). Underwriters, assistants, data processing directors, and
managing field agents came together to address a problem in a rational and
methodical manner. With negotiations that fostered listening to all sides of
the story, subordinates submitting suggestions, bosses making recommendations, approving
final agreements, and implementing changes, we were able to change forms to
coincide with the codes, include addresses, keep codes simply for those who
needed a cheat sheet, and develop a communication product that did not require
translation or additional copies (How To, 2008, Part 1). In the words of
Jeffrey Berman, we were able to “put the business’s interest” first and develop
“a willingness to get the job done in the most efficient way possible” through
negotiations that sparked and stimulated creativity and innovation and helped
to make American Pioneer more of a healthy organization for its workforce and
its field agents (How To, 2008, Part 1).
References
How to relate to people in business. (2008, Feb. 10). Conflict Resolution - Part 1. [Video file].
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2GWmDUKF3o&feature=youtu.be
How to relate to
people in business. (2008, Feb. 10). Conflict Resolution – Part 2. [Video
file].
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vga7bhGd5dI&feature=youtu.be
Whetten, D.A.,
& Cameron, K.S. (2011). Developing
Management Skills. (8th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education,
Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment