NATURE AND SOURCE OF CONFLICT

Purpose:

To discuss the nature and source of conflict.

Objectives:

By the end of this topic, you should be able to:

i. Define conflict.

ii. Describe the nature and source of conflicts

iii. Analyze the classification of the conflict

NATURE AND SOURCE OF CONFLICT

Defining conflict

A conflict could be defined as a process that begins when one of the parties in the interaction

process perceives that another individual or group has frustrated or about to frustrate the

attainment of their needs and goals. Given the potential for real or perceived frustration of some

needs and goals, conflict is a basic fact of life in groups and organizations. It is a universal

phenomenon and is an inevitable feature of organizational life. The very nature of organizations

guarantees the emergence of conflict. First, organizations contain people with divergent

personalities, perceptions, and values. Second, these people are assigned to jobs that have

contrasting characteristics, impart unequal degrees of status, and frequently foster competition.

Finally, organizations contain groups that often have conflicting views and they often compete

for scarce resources in order to achieve their goals. Thus, conflict is an inescapable aspect of

social interactions, an inevitable consequence of the interactions and interdependence between

people and groups. A conflict-free organization has never existed and will never exist.

Antagonism, tensions, aggression, stereotyping, negative attitudes, frustration, and perceived

conflicting needs will always be present, whenever people have to live and work together. An

effective manager must understand the nature of the conflict that is prevalent and its beneficial

effect, and also the type of conflict that is not beneficial. He must, then, deal with conflict in

ways that will promote the individual, group, and organizational goals. It is to be understood that

the management of conflict is an essential pre-requisite to sound human relations.1

Conflict arises from a difference of opinion between the group members while attaining the

organizational goals. An organization is an interlocking network of groups, departments, sections

or work teams. In organizations everywhere, conflict among groups of different interests is

unavoidable. According to one survey, managers spend an estimated percent of their time

dealing with group conflicts. The success of an organization depends upon the harmonious

relations among all independent groups. Managers may either directly resolve the conflicts or

they may act as mediators between two or more employees. In either case, knowledge and

understanding of conflict and the methods of resolving it are important.2 The term “conflict” has

no single clear meaning. Much of the confusion has been created by scholars in different

disciplines who are interested in studying conflict. Systematic reviews of the conflict literature

show a conceptual sympathy for, but a little consensual endorsement of, any generally accepted

definition of conflict. Fink3, in his classic review, has illustrated tremendous variance in conflict
definitions. He discovered a range of definitions for specific interests and a variety of general

definitions that attempt to be all-inclusive. In the organizational area, March and Simon4

consider conflict as a breakdown in the standard mechanisms of decision making, so that an

individual or group experiences difficulty in selecting an alternative. This is a narrow

conceptualization of conflict and is not very useful for research purposes.

Litterer5 and Smith6 consider it as a type of behavior. However, both of these authors and

Tedeschi et al.7 consider conflict to result from incompatibility or opposition in goals, activities,

or interaction among the social entities. Baron8 after reviewing a number of recent definitions of

conflict concluded that although definitions are not identical, they overlap with respect to the

following elements:

i. Conflict includes opposing interests between individuals or groups in a zero-sum

situation;

ii. Such opposed interests must be recognized for conflict to exist;

 iii. Conflict involves beliefs, by each side, that the other will thwart (or has already thwarted)

its interests;

iv. Conflict is a process; it develops out of existing relationships between individuals or

groups and reflects their past interactions and the contexts in which these took place; and

v. Actions by one or both sides do, in fact, produce thwarting of others’ goals (p. ).

Conflict is defined9 as an interactive process manifested in incompatibility, disagreement, or

dissonance within or between social entities (i.e., individual, group, organization, etc.). Calling

conflict an interactive state does not preclude the possibilities of intraindividual conflict, for it is

known that a person often interacts with himself or herself. Obviously, one also interacts with

others. Conflict occurs when one or (two) social entity(ies):

i. Is required to engage in an activity that is incongruent with his or her needs or interests;

ii. Holds behavioral preferences, the satisfaction of which is incompatible with another

person’s implementation of his or her preferences;

iii. Wants some mutually desirable resource that is in short supply, such that the wants of

everyone may not be satisfied fully;

iv. Possesses attitudes, values, skills, and goals that are salient in directing one’s behavior

but that are perceived to be exclusive of the attitudes, values, skills, and goals held by the

other(s);

v. Has partially exclusive behavioral preferences regarding joint actions; and

vi. It is interdependent in the performance of functions or activities.

Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively

affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about. According to

Roloff10, organizational conflict occurs when members engage in activities that are incompatible

with those of colleagues within their network, members of other collectivities, or unaffiliated

individuals who utilize the services or products of the organization. Some of the manifestations

of conflict behavior are expressing disagreement with the opponent, yelling, verbal abuse,

interference, and so on.

Conflict does not necessarily occur simply because there are incompatibilities, disagreements, or

differences within or between social entities. In order for the conflict to occur, it has to exceed

the threshold level of intensity before the parties experience (or become aware of) any conflict.

In other words, the incompatibilities, disagreements, or differences must be serious enough

before the parties experience conflict.11

Classifying conflicts

Conflict may be classified on the basis of its sources. It may also be classified on the basis of

organizational levels (individual, group, etc.) at which it may originate.

Sources of Conflict
The classification of conflict is often made on the basis of the antecedent conditions that lead to

conflict. Conflict may originate from a number of sources, such as tasks, values, goals, and so

on. It has been found appropriate to classify conflict on the basis of these sources for the proper

understanding of its nature and implications.

1. Affective Conflict: This occurs when two interacting social entities while trying to solve

a problem together, become aware that their feelings and emotions regarding some or all

the issues are incompatible12. This category of conflict has been labeled as psychological

conflict13, relationship conflict14, emotional conflict15, and interpersonal conflict16. Pelled

et al.17 defined it as a condition in which group members have interpersonal clashes

characterized by anger, frustration, and other negative feelings.

2. Substantive Conflict: This occurs when two or more organizational members disagree on

their task or content issues18. This type of conflict has also been labeled as task conflict19,
 cognitive conflict20, and issue conflict21. This type of conflict can be characterized as

disagreements among group members’ ideas and opinions about the task being

performed, such as disagreement regarding an organization’s current strategic position or

determining the correct data to include in a report. It is appropriate to distinguish between

substantive affective conflicts. Whereas affective conflict is concerned with the feelings

or emotions of the conflicting parties, substantive conflict is associated with the task or

other business-related issues involved in such a situation.

3. Conflict of Interest: This is defined as an inconsistency between two parties in their

preferences for the allocation of a scarce resource. This type of conflict occurs when each

party, sharing the same understanding of the situation, prefers a different and somewhat

incompatible solution to a problem involving either a distribution of scarce resources

between them or a decision to share the work of solving it. The contention of managers A

and B for the same vice president’s job exemplifies a conflict of interest.

4. Conflict of Values: This occurs when two social entities differ in their values or

ideologies on certain issues. This is also called an ideological conflict. The ideological

disagreement of supervisors A and B on the question of “compensatory hiring” is an

example of value conflict. The conflict between pro-life and pro-choice groups in

connection with abortion is another example of a conflict of values.

5. Goal Conflict: This occurs when a preferred outcome or an end-state of two social

entities is inconsistent. In rare cases it may involve divergent preferences over all of the
 decision outcomes, constituting a zero-sum game. The understanding of managers A and

B that only one of their preferred job design programs can be implemented for their

division is an example of goal conflict.

6. Realistic versus Nonrealistic Conflict: The former refers to incompatibilities that have

rational content (i.e., tasks, goals, values, and means and ends). Nonrealistic conflict

occurs as a result of a party’s need for releasing tension and expressing hostility,

ignorance, or error. Whereas realistic conflict is associated with “mostly rational or goal-

oriented” disagreement, nonrealistic conflict is an end in itself having little to do with a

group or organizational goals22. Realistic and nonrealistic conflicts are similar to

Haiman’s23 intrinsic and extrinsic conflicts. They also correspond with real and induced

conflict, the latter being cases where representatives of conflicting groups have ends to be

gained (e.g., their own prestige) apart from the ends in dispute between groups. This

would be the situation in which union leaders precipitated a conflict with management in

order to strengthen their hold over the union membership.

7. Institutionalized versus Noninstitutionalized Conflict: The former is characterized by

situations in which actors follow explicit rules, and display predictable behavior, and

their relationship has continuity, as in the case of the line–staff conflict or labor-

management negotiations. Most racial conflict is noninstitutionalized where these three

conditions are nonexistent.

 8. Retributive Conflict: This conflict is characterized by a situation where the conflicting

entities feel the need for a drawn-out conflict to punish the opponent. In other words,

each party determines its gains, in part, by incurring costs to the other party. Examples of

retributive conflicts are Northern Ireland and Palestinian–Israeli conflicts and the Cold

War between the former superpowers.

9. Misattributed Conflict: This relates to the incorrect assignment of causes (behaviors,

parties, or issues) to conflict. For example, an employee may wrongly attribute to his or

her supervisor a cut in the employee’s department budget, which may have been done by

higher-level managers over the protest of the supervisor.

10. Displaced Conflict: This type of conflict occurs when the conflicting parties either direct

their frustrations or hostilities to social entities who are not involved in conflict or argue

over secondary, not major, issues.

Levels of Analysis

Organizational conflict may be classified as Intra organizational (i.e., conflict within an

organization) or inter-organizational (i.e., conflict between two or more organizations). Intra

organizational conflict may also be classified on the basis of levels (individual, group, etc.) at

which it occurs. On this basis, intra-organizational conflict may be classified as intrapersonal,

interpersonal, intragroup, and intergroup. These four types of conflict may be described as

follows:

i. Intrapersonal Conflict: This type of conflict is also known as intraindividual or

intrapsychic conflict. It occurs when an organizational member is required to perform

certain tasks and roles that do not match his or her expertise, interests, goals, and values.
 ii. Interpersonal Conflict: This is also known as dyadic conflict. It refers to the conflict

between two or more organizational members of the same or different hierarchical levels

or units. The studies on superior-subordinate conflict relate to this type of conflict.

iii. Intragroup Conflict: This is also known as intradepartmental conflict. It refers to conflict

among members of a group or between two or more subgroups within a group in

connection with its goals, tasks, procedures, and so on. Such a conflict may also occur as

a result of incompatibilities or disagreements between some or all the members of a

group and its leader(s).

iv. Intergroup Conflict: This is also known as interdepartmental conflict. It refers to the

conflict between two or more units or groups within an organization. Conflicts between

line and staff, production and marketing, and headquarters and field staffs are examples

of this type of conflict. On the special type of intergroup conflict is between labor and

management.

Conflicts classified by sources can take place at the interpersonal, intragroup, or intergroup

levels. In other words, incompatibilities caused by these sources can occur in the context of two

individuals, a group, or two groups. It was indicated in the definition of organizational conflict

that conflict may occur within or between social entities. This distinction between conflict within

and conflict between social entities depends on a system perspective for a given problem. The

classification of conflict into four types, based on the level of its origin, shows that analysis at

different levels may be beneficial depending on the nature of the problem(s).24

TYPES OF CONFLICT

In organizations, conflicts can be interpersonal, intra-group, inter-group or intraorganizational in

nature. Intra-organizational conflict encompasses vertical, horizontal, line-staff and role conflict.

1. Vertical Conflict: It refers to conflicts that occur between individuals at different levels.

The conflict between the superior and subordinate is an example of vertical conflict. Such

conflicts could happen because of perceived transgression of psychological contract,

inadequate or ineffective communication, selective perception, misperception,

incongruence in goals, values, cognition, affect and behavior, etc.

2. Horizontal Conflict: It refers to tensions between employees or groups at the same

hierarchical level. Horizontal conflict occurs because of interdependence among the

parties concerned in the work situation or the common pooled resources shared. For

example, sharing personal computers among the various departments is likely to produce

tensions among the departments. Incompatibility of goal and time orientations often

results in horizontal conflicts. Conflicts will take place between the units due to the

misunderstanding and frustration experienced by both parties. Horizontal conflict

increases as:

a. functional interdependence increasers among people or groups at the same level

b. more units depend on common resources that have to be shared raw materials

c. the fewer the buffers or inventories for the resources shared

3. Line and Staff Conflict: It refers to the conflicts that arise between those who assist or

act in an advisory capacity (staff) and those who have direct authority to create the

products, process, and services of the organizing (line). Staff managers and line managers

usually have different personality predispositions and goals and come from different
 backgrounds. Staff managers have specialized skills and expertise acquired through

training and education and have greater technical knowledge which is intended to help

the line manager who is basically money maker for the organization. Staff people serve

as an advisor for the line people in as much as they have the expertise to streamline

methods and help in cost-cutting mechanisms. Line managers may feel that the staff

people are unnecessarily interfering in their work by always telling them how to do their

job and thrusting their ideas and methods. Staff people often get frustrated that the line

people do not consider all the ideas put forth by them and thereby fail to benefit.

4. Role Conflict: It arises because different people in the organization are expected to

perform different tasks and pressures build-up when the expectation of the members clash

in several ways. There are two types of conflict.

i. Inter-sender role conflict: This occurs when different role senders (bosses) expect

the individual to perform different things and these expectations and the messages

conflict with each other

ii. Inter-role conflict: This occurs when the role requires associated with members in

one group conflicts with role requirements stemming from members in another

group.

INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP CONFLICT

INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP CONFLICT

Reasons for Conflict

There are many reasons for conflicts among groups and their members. Some of them are related

to limited resources, communication problems, differences in interests and goals, different

perceptions, attitudes and lack of clarity about responsibilities. The reasons for group conflicts

are as follows:

1. Communication problems: Groups often become very involved in their own areas of

responsibility. They tend to develop their own unique vocabulary. Paying attention to an

area of responsibility is a worthy Endeavour, but it can result in communication

problems. The receiver of information should be considered when a group communicates

an idea, a proposal, or a decision. Misinformed receivers often become irritated and then

hostile.

2. Incompatible goals: Inter-group conflict arises because of goal incompatibility. In other

words, goal attainment by one group may reduce the level of goal attainment by other

groups. This may be due to horizontal differentiation and task specialization. The conflict

between production and marketing departments, line and staff departments, union and

management are a few examples of intergroup conflicts that arise because of the

incompatibility of goals.

3. Task interdependence: Task interdependence means to what extent a work, group relies

on other organizational groups to complete its tasks. In simple words, it refers to the

dependence of one group on another for resources or information. It can be said in

general] that as interdependence increases, the potential for conflict increases. According

to Thompson25, there are three types of interdependence among groups as follows:

 i. Pooled interdependence: It arises when groups have little interaction with each

other but are affected by each other's activities. For example, a branch in Delhi

does not need to interact with a branch in Chennai. The only linkage between the

two is that they share financial resources from a common pool and the success of

each branch contributes to the success of the organization.

ii. Sequential task interdependence: It arises when one group is unable to commence

its work until the work of other groups gets completed. In sequential task

interdependence, the output of one group becomes the input of another group. In

such situations, the potential for conflict is greater. Life and staff groups often

have conflicts resulting from this type of interdependence.

iii. Reciprocal interdependence: It arises between the groups, which depend on each

other for their respective tasks such as the production department and quality

department. The production department provides the goods to the marketing

department to sell and the marketing department prepares the orders and estimates

on the basis of the volume produced by the production department. Inter-group

conflict arises from reciprocal task interdependence over a difference in

performance expectations. Each group is dissatisfied will the quality or quantity

of work received; from the other group.

4. Task ambiguity: The lack of clarity over job responsibilities is called task ambiguity and

it frequently leads to aggression between groups. Inter-group conflict also arises when it

is not clear which group is responsible for certain activities. Task ambiguity often arises

where the organization is growing quickly or the organization's environment is changing

rapidly. A good example of task ambiguity is inter-group conflict arising in the

 recruitment of new employees. It may be the responsibility of either the personnel

department or any of the functional departments such as marketing, finance. The

confusion may also arise regarding who has the final authority to execute the final

decisions.

5. Resource sharing: The relation between two groups can be affected by the degree to

which they make use of a common pool of resources and the degree to which this

common pool of resources is adequate to meet the demands of both the groups. Thus,

conflict of this nature; arises because of the differences between aggregate demand of a

group and available resources to meet them. Each party of the conflict competes with

each other to get a larger share. The conflict between management and the labor union is

the best example. Such conflicts take place in the quantum of wages, amenities, working

conditions and other related matters.

6. The difference in work orientation: The ways in which employees do their work and deal

with others vary widely with the functional areas of an organization. First, functional

groups differ in their time perspectives. For example, R&D scientists have a longer-range

of goals than manufacturing groups. The range of work of the manufacturing group is

evaluated on how quickly it can manufacture high-quality products while the range of

R&D scientists can be evaluated on the basis of product development and testing after a

long period of time. Second, the goals of different functional groups vary to a large

extent. The goals of manufacturing groups are more specific and clear-cut than the goals

of R&D groups. The greater the differences in goal and time between two groups, the

more likely it is that conflict will arise between them while co-ordinating their work
 efforts. These differences between groups result in frustration, misinterpretation of the

behaviors and activities of other groups.

7. Conflicting reward systems: Sometimes the ways in which reward systems in

organizations are designed to create a situation in which one group can only accomplish

its goal at the expense of other groups. For example, staff departments may be rewarded

for cutting costs and personnel while line departments are rewarded for increasing the

number of products sold or services provided. To increase the number of products sold,

the line group may have to depend even more heavily on staff groups such as advertising.

However, the staff groups are being rewarded for cutting costs and personnel provided

the types of services asked for by line groups can prevent them from meeting their own

goals. Conflicting reward systems inevitably result in poor inter-group relations.

8. Different perceptions and attitudes: The attitudes, values, and perceptions of members of

various groups towards each other can be a cause and a consequence of the nature of their

relationship. If the group relations begin with the attitudes of distrust, competitiveness,

secrecy and closed communications, there is a possibility of conflicts, disagreements in

their views and among themselves. This can affect the success of a group to accomplish

their work in an effective manner.

Intrapersonal Conflict

Intrapersonal conflict is a conflict that occurs solely in an individual's mind. The dynamics are

purely psychological. Intrapersonal conflict is the conflict humans face within themselves, it is a

conflict between should and want. Should is always driven by the values, religious beliefs,
upbringing, etc. wants, on the other hand, are driven by the environment which entices humans

to indulge overlooking should.

Intrapersonal Conflict is the part of human life, at every point, humans face intrapersonal

conflicts between should and want. Conflict arises when any kind of decision needs to be taken,

be it important or unimportant. Simple decisions like buying a car or complex decisions like

marriage or money. Every time a decision needs to be taken, we should and want to weigh on us,

based on which we make a decision. Individuals who develop unhealthy habits are also prone to

conflict within, every individual understands smoking an unhealthy habit and most wish to quit,

however, the body which is used to want of nicotine often wins the conflict between should and

want.

Inter-Personal Conflict

Interpersonal conflict involves two or more individuals. Such conflict situations are made up of

at least two individuals who hold polarized points of view, who are somewhat intolerant of

ambiguities, who ignore delicate shades of grey, and who are quick to jump to conclusions.

Individuals, who join an organization, bring along with them certain needs and beliefs. When

they work for the organizational goal the needs, beliefs, values, and customs of individuals do

clash and this results in conflict.

Reasons for inter-personal conflict

The most commonly cited reasons for interpersonal conflict are personality differences,

perceptions, clashes of values and interests, competitive environment, power and status
differences, scarce resources, stereotype behavior, and exploitative nature of human beings.

These are briefly discussed below.

i. Personality differences: Some people have difficulty in getting along with each other.

This is purely a psychological problem and it has nothing to do with their job

requirements or formal interactions.

ii. Perceptions: Varied background, experiences, education, and training result in individuals

developing different perceptions of similar realities; the result being an increase in the

likelihood of interpersonal conflict. Vertical conflicts develop in organizations, usually

because superiors try to control subordinates and subordinates tend to resist. The

subordinate resists because he believes that the control infringes on his personal

autonomy, makes his behavior more predictable to others, and thus weakens his position

in the organization.

iii. Clashes of values and interests: Conflict that so commonly develops between scientists

and administrative and accounts personnel shows how differences in values and interests

might underlie conflict.

iv. Competitive environment: Organizations do reward good work and competence.

Whenever an individual in an organization is rewarded for his good work and useful

results, it triggers off a feeling of frustration and hostility among some other people, who

feel that their self-respect is at stake. This leads to interpersonal conflict among the

individuals in the organization, and also between the affected individuals and the

authority.

v. Power and status differences: Organizations are political structures. They operate by a

distribution of authority and setting a stage for the exercise of power. Unequal
 distribution of power and status would definitely lead to conflict. A lower-grade scientist

when gives an order to a higher-grade scientist, conflict does arise. The lower-grade

scientist may be doing it because of the power vested in him by the manager/director of

the organization.

vi. Scarce resources: Interpersonal conflicts usually result when each person in an

organization jockeys to possess a scarce resource. The belief that somebody else is out to

eat away one’s share of resources may create ill feelings between individuals. When the

scarcity is absolute, i.e. when the resource level cannot be enhanced, it becomes very

difficult to manage interpersonal conflicts. For example, if four qualified individuals vie

for one superior position in the organization, and if there is only one such position, an

interpersonal conflict would develop to an unmanageable level.

vii. Stereotype behavior: Stereotyping makes people form opinions about others, which are

more often through hurried judgments. As a result of this, people tend to behave in a

more biased manner with others, and this leads to interpersonal conflicts. In India, people

belonging to a particular religion, region, caste, and group exhibit a skewed attitude and

behavior towards others belonging to another religion, region, and caste. This leads to a

lot of interpersonal problems in organizations.

viii. Exploitative nature of human beings: In organizations, we always encounter a group of

people who tend to exploit others by virtue of their position, authority, etc. As a result,

they try to take an undue share in the outcome, in spite of the fact that their contribution

is not proportionate to that level. This naturally would lead to interpersonal conflicts in

the long run. Heads of the organizations and departments claiming authorship in the

publications of the scientists working under them, in spite of the fact that they had not
 contributed anything in the work is a typical example of this type of interpersonal

conflict. In fact, in certain organizations, it has become a rule that the names of the Heads

should be included in every publication.

Dynamics of Inter-Group Conflict

The following points are covered in the dynamics of an inter-group conflict:

i. Changes within each group: When there is inter-group conflict in an organization,

systematic changes take place in the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors of the

participants. They are as follows:

a. The group demands more loyalty from individual members while facing an

external threat. In the face of an external threat, past differences and difficulties

between group members are forgotten and group cohesiveness increases.

b. In an inter-group conflict, it is important for a group to respond quickly and in a

unified manner to the activities of other groups. In an inter-group conflict, the

organization and structure of the workgroup become more rigid. It leads to more

coordination of activities, allocation of responsibilities to different group

members.

ii. Changes in relation between groups: The nature of the relationships between groups also

change markedly during inter-group conflicts. Union-Management relationships during

contract negotiations are one of the examples of group dynamics. It becomes difficult for

each group to see the positive behavior and attitude of the other group. Each party

undervalues the interests of the other group. The changes that occur are as follows:

a. There are distortions of perception about one's own group and about the other

group.
 b. The interaction and communication between groups decreases.

c. There is a shift among the groups from a problem-solving motive to a win-lose

motive.

d. There is an increased ill-feeling towards the rival group.

Group Strategies to Gain Power

There are several strategies that various groups use to gain power in an inter-group conflict

situation. Some of these strategies allow co-operation and sharing between groups while other

strategies are more competitive and increase the power of one group at the expense of others.

1. Contracting: It refers to the negotiation or an agreement between two groups. Each group

makes some compromises so that there can be some predictability and stability in their

relationships. for example, contracting occurs between labor and management at the time

of collective bargaining.

2. Co-opting: It occurs when a group gives some of its leadership positions to members of

other groups or includes them in its policy-making committees. For example,

representatives from financial institutions are included in the Board of Directors of a

Company to participate in decision-making activities.

3. Forming association: Informing an association, two or more groups cooperate or

combine their resources in order to increase their power over other groups. Members of

groups co-operate with each other in order to compete more effectively with members of

other groups.

4. Influencing decision criteria: Groups can also sometimes exert power lo change criteria

for decision-making that are selected as the basis for resource distribution.
 5. Controlling Information: Gaining access to sensitive information and then limiting other

group's access lo it increases the power of" the information-' rich group and other

subunits.

6. Pressure tactics: These are applied to force others to use the most competitive strategy a

group can use to gain power. For instance, a union might threaten to strike to pressurize

management. Management reaction to disruptive inter-group conflict can take many

different forms. But management usually tries to minimize the conflict indirectly and if

this fails, become directly involved.

Sources of Inter-Group Conflict:

There are three basic sources of inter-group conflict: i) goal incompatibility, ii) decision-making

requirements and iii) performance expectations.

1. Goal incompatibility: It is defined as the lack of agreement concerning the direction of

group activity and the criteria for evaluating task accomplishment, is the most frequently

identified source for inter-group conflict. Two critical elements that contribute to goal

incompatibility are i) time and goal orientation and ii) barriers to goal accomplishment.

Different time (short versus long term) and goal (techno-economic, market and scientific)

orientation crate a state of differentiation between two or more interacting groups. When

to widely differing groups, such as manufacturing (short-term and techno-economic

orientation) and research (long-term and scientific orientation) interact, this state of time

and goals orientation differentiating can act as sources of conflict. If goal attainment by

one group is seen as preventing other groups from achieving their goals, barriers to goal

accomplishment arise.
2. Decision-making requirements: This concerns the particular requirements for decision-

making used by each of the interacting groups. Two aspects that are related to decision-

making requirements are:

i. Degree of task uncertainty: It refers to one of the basic characteristics of inter-

group behavior. The nature of the particular task being performed by each of the

interacting groups may require different amounts of information flow before a

decision can be reached. The greater the task uncertainty inherent in each task, the

greater the need for additional information.

ii. Availability of Resources: This causes conflict when there is a struggle between

interacting groups for limited resources needed to accomplish their goals. An

organization must divide limited financial, equipment and manpower resources

among different groups in what they believe is the most efficient and equitable

manner. This conflict situation can result in such negative consequences as

withholding information, disruptive behavior, and similar dysfunctional activities

that can adversely affect the organization’s overall performance.

3. Performance Expectations: The third source of inter-group conflict concerns the

situation in which the activities or performance of one group affects the subsequent

performance of other groups. For example, in hospitals, surgeons perform their function

after the anesthesiologists have successfully performed their role; on assembly lines, tires

are placed on automobiles after workers have installed the brakes, etc. Performance

expectations in inter-group behavior are directly related to the type of interdependence

existing between groups. The nature of the three types of interdependence are pooled,
 sequential, reciprocal pose a respectively potential for conflict between interacting

groups. That is, as inter-group relations progress from pooled to reciprocal

interdependence, there is an increasing dependence of one group on another to perform

their particular task. When one group acts improperly or fails to meet the performance

expectation of the other group, a potential conflict situation can arise. The potential for

conflict is greatest with reciprocal interdependence due to the intensity of the interactions

between groups.

Methods to Solve Inter-group Conflict Indirectly26

The various methods to solve inter-group conflicts indirectly are as follows:

1. Avoidance: It is an indirect method often used by the managers. It includes avoidance of

direct approaches on the part of managers to solve among groups. But avoidance does not

always minimize the problem. Matters can get worse if nothing is done and the groups

can become more aggressive and unfriendly.

2. Encouragement: This is another indirect method to solve group conflicts. It includes

encouragement on the part of managers to the groups so that they will be able to meet and

discuss their differences. By doing so, they can find out a solution without the

involvement of management.

3. Bargaining: This is the indirect method, in which the groups agree as to what each of

them will get and give others regarding their work. This makes the accomplishment of

the assigned task much easier. For example, one group may agree to give the other, quick

turnaround time on the repairs of needed equipment only if the Second group agrees to
 bring complaints about the quality of repairs to it before going to management.

Bargaining between the two groups is successful if both groups are comfortable with the

agreement between them.

4. Persuasion: This is the indirect method, in which the groups find the areas of common

interests among themselves. The groups try to find out those interest levels where they

have the same say. Afterward', the groups try to show how important it is to each of them

in attaining organizational goals. But persuasion is possible only if there are no clashes

between the groups and its members

Methods to Solve Inter-Group Conflict

The various methods to solve inter-group conflicts directly are as follows:

1. Ignoring the conflict: This is a direct method used by (the managers to solve inter-group

conflicts. Ignoring the conflict is characterized by the absence of behavior wherein the

members of the groups avoids dealing with the dysfunctional aspects of the conflict. In

this, a group simply refuses to attack the other group. But the disadvantage of this method

is that it ignores the causes of conflicts and as a result, the conflict situation frequently

continues or gets worse over time.

2. Domination by the management: This method of solving inter-group conflicts emphasizes

improving inter-group relations. To improve inter-group relations, greater integration or

collaboration among groups is needed. Management can use domination to minimize the

conflicts by exercising its authority and power over the groups and their members.

3. Removing the key figures in the conflict: This is another direct method to solve the

intergroup conflicts. If a conflict arises because of personality differences between two

 individuals, removing them is a possible solution. It includes the removal of the key

figures in the conflict. The key figures that are to be removed may be leaders of the

groups and removing them could lead to greater conflict. It is also difficult to pinpoint

accurately the individuals who are the root-cause of conflicts.

4. Problem-solving: Management can also establish a task force with representatives from

groups in conflict to work on problems. The task force develops the ideas and procedures

for improving group interaction and thereby attempt to solve the conflicts arising between

the groups.

5. Appealing to super-ordinate goals. The final method to minimize conflicts is to find

super-ordinate goals. These are goals desired by two or more groups that can only be

accomplished through the cooperation of the groups. When conflicting groups have to

cooperate to accomplish a goal, conflict can be minimized. For example, a wide profit-

sharing plan of a company may encourage groups to work together. If the profits of a

company are distributed among employees at the end of the year, the conflicts among

groups can reduce. The superordinate goals are as follows: The assignment and

coordination of work among groups should be clarified so that the daily disputes over

minor issues can be avoided. Managers should monitor reward systems to eliminate any

win-lose conflicts among groups.

6. The use of co-operative approaches among groups in organizations often leads to more

positive results than does the use of competitive approaches. Managers can establish rules

and standard procedures to regulate conflict in more constructive and effective ways.
ii. Dysfunctional Consequences

 The mental health of some combatants may be adversely affected because of the

emotional stress reactions precipitated in such people. Tolerance levels are different i.e.

low and high.

 Intergroup conflict of a high intense nature usually results in a misallocation of

organizational resources i.e. time wanted to fight or combat one another, material and

personnel are likely to be misused. People waste the organization's time, funds, materials,

and personnel in carrying out warfare.

 Sub-optimization of part of the system occurs when disputants push their own position to

the extreme.

 The distortion of goals may occur as people begin to concentrate their attention on petty

issues or embark on fault-finding, regarding their opponents instead of pursuing their

assigned missions.
References

1. Theodore M Mills (1967). The Sociology of Small Groups. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:

Prentice-Hall. pp. 14–17. OCLC 255221.

2. ^ a b c Daniel Katz; Robert Louis Kahn (1966). The social psychology of organizations.

New York: Wiley. pp. 18–33. OCLC 255184.

3. ^ a b c d John E Jones; J William Pfeiffer (1973). The 1973 annual handbook for group

facilitators. San Diego, Calif.: University Associates. pp. 106–

109. ISBN 9780883900819. OCLC 9160197.

4. ^ a b Henry P Knowles; Börje O Saxberg (1971). Personality and leadership behavior.

Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. pp. Chapter 8. OCLC 118832.

5. ^ De Angelis, Paula: Blindsided: Recognizing and Dealing with Passive-Aggressive

Leadership in the Workplace, (Kindle Edition - Jun 22,2008

6. Lindred Greer, Managing Conflict in Teams (8-min video). Stanford Graduate School of

Business. Professor Lindred Greer gives tips for managing conflicts, which left

unchecked, can go viral, hurt productivity, and create employee turnover.

7. ^ Kenneth Kaye (1994). Workplace Wars and How to End Them: Turning Personal

Conflict into Productive Teamwork. New York: AMACOM. ISBN 0-8144-0215-1.