In these regards, its clear that while the overarching conflict regards Peter Smiths conservative nature, the conflict goes beyond this to indicate that the two men have a deep and underlining difference in personal philosophy. While these are the specific reasons for the conflict, from a managerial and organizational perspective, the conflict the men are experiencing is related to their individual role within the organization. As board chairman Peter Smith believes that it is his role to ensure the safe and sound direction of the art center; conversely, Keith Schmidt understands that as executive director he was hired to oversee and ensure the expansion of the art center from its current state to that of a nationally recognized center along the lines of the previous projects that he has overseen. While the individuals have a conflict of personal philosophy, there also exists a conflict regarding their roles within the organization. It follows then that the ultimate conflict that the two men are experiencing relates to their power and decision making ability within the MCA. As an area of contention, its clear that their individual roles need to be more accurately defined within the organization to deter future conflict. While the definition of board member and executive director generally contains the understanding that the board member will not interfere in the day to day operations of the executive director, its clear that to an extent Peter Smith has assumed greater responsibility than his job definition has allowed, and as a result the organizational conflict has arisen between. Midwestern Contemporary Art Case.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples