Example of Conflict in the Workplace

For this prompt, I thought I would use as an example my favorite movie and book, Moneyball. In this story, the main character, Oakland Athletics General Manager Billy Beane (played by Brad Pitt in the film), faces the challenge of putting together a competitive baseball team despite having a payroll far less flexible than many of the other competing teams in the American League. After the 2001 season in which his A's were defeated in the playoffs by the New York Yankees who boasted nearly triple the payroll of the A's, several key A's players leave the team via free agency to sign with teams that could afford to pay them far more the Oakland could. In order to fill holes on the rosters without spending very much money both in the short and long-term future, Beane knew he had to approach free agency and the draft differently. Therefore, he turned to sabermetrics, the science and empirical analysis of baseball statistics. Using sabermetrics, Beane hoped to find value in players that other teams didn't see. However, this strategy also required that Beane overlook aspects of baseball and baseball players that others in the industry did value, including many within his own organization. This is where the conflict comes in. Beane's outlook conflicts with scouting director Grady Fuson (Ken Medlock) and manager Art Howe (Philip Seymour Hoffman), both of whom believe in the more traditional approach to baseball operations. 

This conflict (Since Fuson and Howe have similar takes on baseball operations, I'll lump everything in as one conflict despite Beane having separate run-ins with Fuson and Howe) stems from a fundamental disagreement on how a baseball team should be put together and utilized on the field, but it goes much deeper than simply wanting what is best for the team for both sides. 

Beane realizes if he continues to approach building his team the same way as other organizations do, he'll lose because other clubs can simply outspend him. Therefore, he decides to find the most efficient way possible to put a team together. Through studying the sabermetric teachings of Bill James, Beane and his Assistant GM Paul DePodesta (named Peter Brand and played by Jonah Hill in the film) determine that the two statistics most closely correlated to scoring runs are On-Base Percentage (OBP) and Slugging Percentage. All other stats have lesser influence on scoring runs and therefore winning games. Therefore, Beane decides to go after free agents and amateur players based solely on their career OBP and Slugging. In doing this, Beane is able to find several players who other teams wouldn't look twice at. This raises eyebrows in Beane's scouting department. Fuson argues that these players cannot play as they are un-athletic, play poor defense, and lack raw power, an understandable argument coming from a scout whose job it is to find the most talented players in the world. Beane dismisses Fuson, noting that those other aspects, those that Fuson values, don't matter to him. 

When it comes to putting these players into the lineup, Howe refuses, applying the same logic as Fuson, that the players Beane has added are less talented and therefore shouldn't play. When Howe repeatedly disobeys Beane's orders to play the the players as Beane designed them to be played, Beane trades away the players in front of those he preferred on the depth chart, forcing Howe to play the players as Beane wants. 

Fuson and Howe could simply say, "oh well, Billy's the boss. If this fails, it's on him.", but that would not only violate their fundamental beliefs about baseball, which had been molded over decades in the industry, but would also endanger their future in the industry. In baseball, individuals are evaluated by the decisions they've made throughout their career. They are judged by these decisions even when they belong to someone else. If Howe would have played the players Beane demanded him to and those players were to have played poorly, it would be Howe that received the criticism from fans and the media. Also, he wouldn't be able to explain it in job interviews for managerial jobs in the future. He would either have to take the blame for the poor decision or admit that he was steamrolled by his own GM. Why was this a major problem for Howe? I mentioned earlier how thin the budget was in Oakland. With players being run in and out, Howe could bet he wouldn't last long there no matter how well he did. If the organization wouldn't put their faith in him with a contract extension, why should he put faith in their system, which could seriously damage his reputation? The same goes for Fuson, who felt his position would be all but obsolete with Beane ignoring scouting reports and basing decision solely on statistics. Both Howe and Fuson would have to take on a great amount of risk in order to follow Beane's orders, and considering Oakland would unlikely retain either even if the plan succeeds, the positive outcome was minuscule comparatively.

Despite Fuson and Howe feeling similarly about the situation, the two experience far different outcomes. Fuson resigns after getting into a verbal altercation with Beane (or so the movie depicts). In reality, Fuson left the organization for a Assistant GM postion with the Texas Rangers. Howe, on the other hand, lets the team be after Beane ties his hands and when the team eventually succeeds, Howe receives a fair amount of the credit. 

This shows that this particular conflict had very different potential outcomes. The interesting part of these outcomes is that they were reached through almost the set of circumstances. Neither Beane nor Howe made any compromises in order to reach a different outcome than Beane reached with Fuson. Perhaps Howe did give Beane a longer leash than Fuson did before he walked away from the organization. The important thing to note about the outcome and the conflict in general is that Beane, acting as the superior with control over the situation, would not have compromised on his strategy regardless of the consequences. He was ready to see his plan through even if meant losing his job in the case that his plan failed. 

This outlook of Beane's verges on opportunism when it comes to others in the organization, namely Fuson. As I mentioned earlier, the statistical element to Beane's decision making process to an extent replaced the scouting element. If Beane doesn't care about how athletic a player is or how his swing looks, why even bother with scouting? Beane's opportunity to find players at a better value to the organization meant potentially making the entire scouting department, including Fuson, obsolete and non-essential. The only step further Beane could have went with this process was to eliminate the scouting department altogether, which would cost several people their jobs. 

That action would have been one of several transaction costs of the new baseball operations system. "Adapt or die" Beane says in the film. Howe and Fuson were just two of many within the organization who had to either completely change their own approach to the game they had played and/or studied for years or find another job. 

Ultimately, Beane's plan was successful. The A's went onto earn the American League's best record in 2002 and Beane's system was implemented by several other organizations throughout baseball as a pinnacle of efficiency in a sport where efficiency was sorely needed. However, I don't believe one could argue very effectively that the specific conflict I've described went as well as it could have. Beane essentially worked around both Fuson and Howe, taking the bat out of their hands you might say. In an organization in which employees aren't as easily expendable, Beane almost surely wouldn't be able to treat Howe and Fuson as he did.