As a project manager, it is significant to understand the situation of conflict before

being able to manage it, in order to choose the most suitable coping strategy. These
conflict situations include: the cause of the conflict, the degree of dependence of the
two parties in the conflict, potential conflicts of interest, the comparison of strengths,
the complexity of the problem, and the interaction between the two parties.

How to manage conflict

Conflict management is the use of certain intervention methods to change the level
and form of conflict in order to maximize the benefits and minimize the damage. In an
organization, the project manager usually begins by identifying the appropriate
conflict management approach and selecting the appropriate conflict management
strategy. These five resolving modes are Forcing, Confronting, Compromising,
Avoiding and Smoothing.

Forcing is used when there is an unexpected situation that one party is eager to win
and ignores the needs and concerns of the other party. This situation brings to a
win-lose situation where one party wins at the cost of the other party's interests.
Project managers can use forcing when:
 There is a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate
action.
 Encounter an unusual situation.
 Public interest related.
 A decision must be made immediately.

Confronting is known as cooperate and win-win solution which aims to solve the
problems. The conflicting parties should sit together to negotiate in order to cooperate
to reach an agreement that meets the needs of both parties. This mode supplies a
communication which is open and straightforward and leads to solve the problem.
Using confronting when:
Both parties need to win and their concerns are very important and cannot be
compromised.
 Integrate different perspectives.
 Integrate different relationships.
 The goal is clear.

Compromising is known as a "dedication" style. Both conflicting parties reach an

agreement by giving up part of their claims. Compromising should be used when:
 The goal is clear, but it is not worth the effort, or there is a potential collapse
crisis.
 Evenly matched opponents repel each other.
 Time and cost are not sufficient.
 There is a very complicated issue.
 Cooperation and coercion are unsuccessful.
Avoiding is described as "putting off an issue for later". Avoiding should be used
when:
 The issue is trivial, or there are more important issues.
 There is no chance to win.
 The potential loss exceeds the benefit of solving the problem.
 Both conflicting parties need to be calmed down.
 Collecting information is more important than making decisions.
 Others can solve problems more efficiently.

Smoothing emphasizes the areas of agreement while downplays the area of

disagreement. In the smoothing mode, conflicts are not always resolved. A party may
gratify the concerns or interests of the other party at the expense of its own concerns
or interests. Smoothing should be used when:
 Minimize losses.
 The stakes are low.
 Harmony and stability are more important.
 Any solution is adequate.

How to resolve disputes

It is significant to manage a dispute rapidly and positively in order to support early
and effective settlement.
Dispute resolution involves the process of resolving disputes and conflicts by
addressing at least some of the needs of each party. Dispute resolution can be said to
have a wide range of applications, from negotiation between the parties to a dispute,
which is the most informal form, to formal court hearings with strict procedural rules,
increased formalities, and more outside political interference. Dispute resolution
methods include negotiation, Alternative Dispute Resolution, and court practice.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a series of dispute resolution procedures
involving external third parties that can be considered alternatives to litigation. In
order to resolve disputes before legal proceedings are initiated, ADR methods such as
mediation, conciliation, conciliation, neutral evaluation, expert judgment, litigation,
and arbitration may be used.
Negotiation is the most common form of dispute resolution. The advantages of
negotiation are cost savings and speed. It is preferred in most disputes.
In mediation, a neutral third party assists in negotiations. The involvement of a neutral
third party is more effective than negotiation. If traditional negotiations fail,
mediation should be preferred.
Mediation: In contrast to conciliation, the mediator proposes a solution.
A neutral evaluation can be used to test the reasonableness of the legal aspects of the
case, which is particularly useful when a dispute goes to court. Another advantage of a
paper-based process is that it saves time and money on hearings.
Expert Determination: The opinions of experts in the dispute field dominate the
outcome of the dispute for the parties. If the dispute is about a professional matter, it
could be useful. Powers to investigate the background would be given to the expert to
make the final decision.
Court Decision: This is an adversarial proceeding in which the judge's decision is
binding on the parties, at least until a new proceeding (arbitration or trial) is initiated.
Arbitration is a formal, private and binding procedure. It is governed by the
Arbitration Act of 1996. An independent court is responsible for resolving disputes.
The arbitral tribunal is appointed by agreement of the parties or by another
independent body, such as a court or professional organization.
Litigation is the only choice when the use of a consensual process is not offered for in
the contract and cannot also be agreed. It has both obvious advantages and
disadvantages. On the positive side, while it may be possible to include parties who
do not wish to participate in the proceedings, this may be time consuming and costly.

Evaluate the use [either real or potential] of Principled Negotiation in your

country or industry [state the country and or industry].
In Getting to Yes, Fischer, Urie, and Barton describe four basic elements of the rules
of the trade.
 Separate the people from the problem.
 Focus on the business, not the position.
 Identify mutually beneficial options.
 Adhere to objective criteria.
For example, Lenovo is a large enterprise and technology company with various
developments in the information technology industry in China. In 2005, Lenovo
Group acquired the IBM Personal computer business unit. In this acquisition project,
principled negotiation was applied.
On December 8, 2004, Lenovo negotiated the acquisition of IBM's global
THINKPAD desktop and notebook business for $1.25 billion. This negotiation is an
example of the successful application of principled negotiation by the Chinese
enterprise Lenovo, which is a win-win negotiation. Both Lenovo and IBM have
realized benefits through this acquisition: Firstly, Lenovo quickly entered the
international market through mergers and acquisitions to gain international
competitiveness. After the completion of the acquisition, Lenovo ranked fourth in
global market share in 2006 (7% market share) and first in global market share in
2015 (21% market share). Secondly, the purchase of the five-year license to use the
IBMPC brand and the THINKPAD notebook brand has enabled Lenovo to rapidly rise
from a domestic brand to an internationally renowned brand. Thirdly, it has won the
international marketing network and customers of IBMPC. Fourthly, it has acquired
IBMPC's R&D centers in Yamato (Japan) and Raleigh (North Carolina, USA). Fifth,
it has acquired international management talents and experience. In the United States,
IBM also made a profit on the sale of its PC business: first, it disposed of its PC
business at a loss and demanded the problem after the sale to Lenovo. Second, the
profit margin improved significantly. After the sale of the PC business, IBM's
turnover increased to more than $90 billion, and the company's gross and net profit
margins improved significantly. Thirdly, the company has made a strategic transition
from a company that develops and manufactures both software and hardware to a
software and services company. The reason why it could reach this win-win situation
is that both parties continually present new alternatives (BATNA) to facilitate the
negotiation process. For example, Lenovo estimates several alternatives before each
negotiation and discusses each detail up and down. To control maintenance costs,
Lenovo creatively compares market prices and has limited obligations for accidents
and service levels. He also proposed a new recruitment plan.
From this example, we can conclude that the goal of winning a negotiation is to see
the negotiation as a collaborative process, breaking the traditional pattern of
distributing benefits, treating the other party as a partner rather than a competitor, and
exploring new alternatives together. In any negotiation, a win-win outcome is a
successful negotiation.

Reference:
1. Kerzner H. Conflicts. In:Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning,
Scheduling, and Controlling. New York, NY:John Wiley & Sons, 2001, pp 379-408
2. Conflict Resolution in Project Management. URL:
https://www.umsl.edu/~sauterv/analysis/488_f01_papers/Ohlendorf.htm#acr
3. Capozzoli TK. Conflict resolution-a key ingredient in successful teams.
Supervision (60:11), 1999, pp 14-16
4. Al-Tabtabai H, Alex AP, Aboualfotouh A. Conflict resolution using cognitive
analysis approach. Project Management Journal(32:2), 2001, pp 4-16
5. Fenn, P. (2008). 11 Conflict Management and Dispute Resolution. Commercial
Management of Projects: Defining the Discipline, 234.
6. Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Andrade, F., Zeleznikow, J., & Neves, J. (2013). Using
case-based reasoning and principled negotiation to provide decision support for
dispute resolution. Knowledge and Information Systems, 36(3), 789-826.