CONFLICT MANAGEMENT – NEGOTIATION & CONSENSUS

INTRODUCTION
Conflict is generally defined as the internal or external discord that results from
differences in ideas, values, or feelings between two or more people. Because managers have
interpersonal relationships with people having a variety of different values, beliefs,
backgrounds, and goals, conflict is an expected outcome.
Conflict is also created when there are differences in economic and professional values and
when there is competition among professionals. Any organisation in which people interact
has a potential for conflict. Health care institutions include many interacting groups: staff
with staff, staff with patients, staff with families and visitors, staff with physicians, and so
on. These interactions frequently lead to conflicts.
Conflict relates to human feelings, including feelings of neglect, of being taken for granted,
of being treated like a servant, of not being appreciated, of being ignored, and of being
overloaded.

HISTORY OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Early in 20th century, conflict was considered to be an indication of poor organizational
management, was deemed destructive and was avoided at all costs. when conflict occurred, it
was ignored, denied or dealt with immediately and harshly. The theorists of this era believed
that conflict could be avoided if employees were taught the one right way to do things and if
expressed employee classification was met swiftly with disapproval.

In the mid-20th century, when organization recognized that worker satisfaction and feedback
were important, conflict was accepted passively and perceived as normal and expected.
Attention centred on teaching managers how to resolve conflict rather than how to prevent it.
Although conflict considered to be primarily dysfunctional, it was believed that conflict and
cooperation could happen simultaneously.

Conflict also has a qualitative nature. A person may be totally overwhelmed in one conflict
situation, yet to be handle several simultaneous conflicts at a later time. The difference is in
the quality or significance of that conflict to the person experiencing it.

TERMINOLOGIES
1. Conflict: is the dissension that occurs when two or more individual with different values,
interests, goals or needs view things from different perspectives.
2. Intrapersonal conflict: conflict that occurs within the individual.
3. Interpersonal conflict: conflict that occurs between two or more people.
4. Organizational conflict: conflict that occurs between two or more people in an
organization setting.
MEANING & DEFINITION OF CONFLICT
• Conflict can be defined as an expressed struggle between at least two interdependent
parties, who perceive that incompatible goals, scarce resources, or interference from others
are preventing them from achieving their goals (Wilmot & Hocker, 2001).
• Conflict is related to feelings, including feelings of neglect, of being viewed as taken for
granted, of being treated like a servant, of not being appreciated, of being ignored, of being
overloaded, and other instances of perceived unfairness.
• Conflict management is the process of planning to avoid conflict where possible and
organizing to resolve conflict where it does happen, as rapidly and smoothly as possible.

TYPES OF CONFLICTS
Conflict has been described and studied from the standpoint of its context, or where it
occurs. 3 types of conflicts are
 Intrapersonal conflict:
An intrapersonal conflict occurs within an individual in situations in which he or she
must choose between two alternatives. Choosing one alternative means that he or she
cannot have the other; they are mutually exclusive. E.g. we might internally debate
whether to complete an assignment that is due the next day or watch a favourite
television programme.
 Interpersonal conflict:
conflict between two or more individuals. It occurs because of differing values, goals,
action, or perceptions. For e.g. when you want to go to a science fiction movie, but your
partner may prefer to attend an opera. Interpersonal conflict becomes more difficult when
we are involved in issues relating to racial, ethnic and life style values and norms.
 Organizational conflicts:
conflict also occurs in organization because of differing perceptions or goals.
Organizational conflicts may be intrapersonal or interpersonal, but they originate in the
structure and function of the organization. Typically, aspects of the organisations style of
management, rules, policies and procedures give rise to conflict. When a conflict occurs
within an organization, it is important that the conflict be resolved in a constructive way
in order to maintain the team’s motivation. The leader’s role takes on special
significance.
Two areas responsible for conflict in organisations are role ambiguity and role conflict.
• Role ambiguity occurs when employees do not know what to do, how to do it, or what the
outcomes must be. This frequently occurs when policies and rules are ambiguous and
unclear.
• Role conflict occurs when two or more individuals in different positions within the
organization believe that certain actions or responsibilities belong exclusively to them. The
conflict could relate to competition. E.g. In some hospitals, conflict have existed between the
nurse and the social workers about the responsibility for providing discharge planning. Both
groups see discharge planning as an important aspect of their own care of the patients.
CAUSES OF CONFLICT
1. Vertical conflict:
Occurs between hierarchical levels
2. Horizontal conflict:
Occurs between persons or groups at the same hierarchical level.
3. Line-staff conflict:
Involves disagreements over who has authority and control over specific matters
4. Role conflict:
Occurs when the communication of task expectations proves inadequate or upsetting
5. Work-flow interdependencies:
Occur when people or units are required to cooperate to meet challenging goals.
6. Domain ambiguities:
Occurs when individuals or groups are placed in ambiguous situations where it
difficult to determine who is responsible for what.
7. Recourse scarcity:
When resources are scarce, working relationships are likely to suffer.
8. Power or value asymmetries:
Occurs when interdependent people or groups differ substantially from one another in
status and influence or in values.

CHARACTERISTICS OF CONFLICT
The characteristics of a conflict situation are:
 At least two parties (individuals or groups) are involved in some kind of interaction.
 Mutually exclusive goals and mutually exclusive values exist, either in fact or as
perceived by the patients involved.
 Interaction is characterized by behaviour destined to defeat, reduce, or suppress the
opponent or to gain a mutually designated victory
 The parties face each other with mutually opposing actions and counteractions.
 Each party attempts to create an imbalance or relatively favoured position of power vis-
a-vis the other

EFFECT OF CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATIONS

New ideas Stress/anxiety

POSITIVE EFFECTS

Creativity Demotivation
Change Staff quitting
NEGATIVE EFFECTS

Problem Non-
solving productivity
 NEGOTIATION
INTRODUCTION

Negotiation is a dialogue between two or more people or parties intended to reach a

mutually beneficial outcome, resolve points of difference, to gain advantage for an individual
or collective, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests.
Negotiation is a dialogue between two or more people or parties to reach the desired outcome
regarding one or more issues of conflict. It is an interaction between entities who aspire to
agree on matters of mutual interest. The agreement can be beneficial for all or some of the
parties involved. The negotiators should establish their own needs and wants while also
seeking to understand the wants and needs of others involved to increase their chances of
closing deals, avoiding conflicts, forming relationships with other parties, or maximizing
mutual gains
Negotiation is a strategic process of arriving at an agreement by two or more individuals,
teams, or groups.
during a negotiation process, an issue is addressed, a problem is resolved, and a conclusion is
derived. Actions are based on what is agreed upon in the negotiation. Having
great negotiation skills is an asset.

DEFINITION

‘It is defined as ‘an interpersonal decision-making process necessary whenever we cannot

achieve our objectives single-handedly.’

It is a form of decision making.

It is an exchange of series of offers by two or more people/group of people. It is a bargaining,
deal making process.
Negotiations do not always end in an agreement. Those making a decision by negotiation
usually have the option of choosing some other solution of saying, no , of walking away, of
minding their own business.

GOAL
The goal of negotiation is to resolve points of difference, gain an advantage for an individual
or collective, or craft outcomes to satisfy various interests.
 Distributive negotiations, or compromises, are conducted by putting forward a position
and making concessions to achieve an agreement.
 The degree to which the negotiating parties trust each other to implement the
negotiated solution is a major factor in determining the success of a negotiation.
People negotiate daily, often without considering it a negotiation.
 Negotiations may occur in organizations, including businesses, non-profits, and
governments, as well as in sales and legal proceedings.
PRINCIPLES
• Maintain self-identity and insight into your own motives, values, perception and skills.
• Understand others values without judging them to be better or worse but only different
from your own.
• View issues as potentially solvable.
• Use personal flexibility in analyzing and reacting to issues and behaviours,
• Use skills to repair damaged relationships, including the ability to retreat and regroup
in a manner that allows for perceptual openness.
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS
There are many different ways to categorize the essential elements of negotiation :

Behaviour

Process substance

ELEMENTS

Process refers to how the parties negotiate: the context of the negotiations, the parties to the
negotiations, the tactics used by the parties, and the sequence and stages in which all of these
play out.
Behaviour refers to the relationships among these parties, the communication between them,
and the styles they adopt.
Substance refers to what the parties negotiate over: the agenda, the issues (positions and –
more helpfully – interests), the options, and the agreement(s) reached at the end.

strategy

tactics elements process

tools,

Strategy comprises top-level goals. Which typically include the relationship and the
outcome.
Processes and tools include the steps to follow and roles to take in preparing for and
negotiating with the other parties.
Tactics include more detailed statements and actions and responses to others' statements and
actions. Some add to this persuasion and influence, asserting that these have become integral
to modern-day negotiation success, and so should not be omitted.

TYPES OF NEGOTIATION
Negotiation is an important skill for the modern professional. Sometimes, negotiation also
involves meeting each other halfway as a compromise when both sides are on opposite sides
of the spectrum. There are various types of negotiation:
1. Distributive
negotiation

5. Positional 2. Integrative
negotiation negotiation

4. Team
3. Multiparty
negotiation
negotiation

1. Distributive negotiation
distributive negotiation is when two parties bargain over a single product or issue, such as
price.
For example, negotiating with a dealer over the price of a second-hand vehicle or bargaining
with a street vendor. Here, one party wins and the other has to take a step back and suffers a
loss. Your success eventually depends on your distributive negotiation skills.

2. Integrative negotiation
do you know what happens when representatives of an employees’ union meet the
management with their demands? They discuss, argue, present, oppose, convince, and so on.
Then, they strike a deal on salaries and other benefits. This is called integrative negotiation.
It is one of the types of negotiation where there is more than one issue that has to be put
through the negotiation process. Both parties gain something from the negotiation. An
integrative negotiation process ensures a win-win situation.

3. Multiparty negotiation
The Multiparty negotiation process involves three or more parties undertaking various
negotiation strategies to drive home their points. When six friends are deciding the venue of
the party and discussing its pros and cons, the type of negotiation can be said to be
multiparty.

4. Team negotiation
This Type of negotiation process takes place between the two teams. For example,
negotiation strategies between the teams of two companies that are looking to merge are
called team negotiations.
While putting together a negotiation team, a company looks for members with excellent
negotiation skills and highly developed strategic thinking capacities.

5. Positional negotiation
Positional negotiation is when you spell out the position you are in, at the outset. Then, you
defend that position against the attack. Important among the types of negotiation, positional
negotiation sees both parties having fixed stances and sticking to them obstinately. They may
not consider the other party’s interest or see where they are coming from. Positional
negotiation is not considered very productive.

DIFFERNCE BETWEEN DISTRIBUTIVE NEGOTIATION & INTEGRATIVE

NEGOTIATION
DISTRIBUTIVE NEGOTIATION
Fixed amount of resources to be divided
Win-lose
Opposed to each other
Short term relationship
Views other party as a competitor
Focuses on meeting his interests rather than Focuses on mutual interests of all the parties
loss the others may have to face
INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION
Variable amount of resources to be divided
Mutual benefit WIN-WIN
Convergent with each other
Long term relationship
Integrative negotiation is collaborative & all
parties negotiate on friendly terms.
and comes up with constructive solutions
that will be beneficial for all.

FIVE STAGES OF THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS

1. Preparation
research is a building block of the negotiation process. While preparing, you must weigh
both sides, identify the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, and then determine your
negotiation strategies. Define the kind of interaction you want to have and the bond you
intend to form with the other party.

2. Information exchange
the information exchange involves discovering and creating value for the negotiation
process. It also helps in building rapport.
Both parties should explain their interests and exchange their viewpoints to achieve the
desired results. Unless there is a transparent exchange of information, even sophisticated
negotiation strategies won’t work.

3. Bargaining
In all types of negotiation, a bargain is of utmost importance. It is the beginning of give-and-
take deals. Each party proposes its demands and seeks to secure benefits. During the
bargaining process, it is imperative to keep yourself in check. Don’t lose your cool or
become emotional during negotiations. To achieve your desired outcomes, train yourself to
be composed and diplomatic.

4. Conclude
once a solution that is acceptable to both has been reached, both parties should thank each
other. They should confirm that interests have been secured and the outcome has been
successful. A good summing-up and amicable closing always lead to rewarding long-term
relationships.

5. Execute
All types of negotiation lead to effective implementation. The steps to implement the
negotiated result should be categorically chalked out. Often, in the corporate context, a
written contract is entered into to confirm the intent to execute.
Barriers to good negotiation
ego is considered the biggest obstacle to good negotiation. Knowing the other side is
important before you put your cards on the table. That’s the reason why big corporations
send a multi-functional team for an important negotiation.

BARRIERS THAT MAY HAMPER A NEGOTIATION

Taking negotiations as personal battles and focussing too much on winning.
• maintaining a know-it-all attitude and failing to ask genuine questions.
being hostile and thinking negatively during the negotiation process.
• Inability to grasp the problems and positions of the other party in the negotiation
process.
• entering a negotiation unprepared and uninformed and having no credible answers for
the questions asked being short-tempered, sarcastic, lacking listening skills, and
criticizing too much.
• how to develop good negotiation skills.
• look at negotiation as a puzzle to be solved rather than a battle to be won
• listen with attention and be empathetic.
• ensure that the negotiation is a win-win situation or it creates frustration.
• instead of focussing on compromising, gear your efforts to achieve your interest.
• work on your people skills and communication skills.
• practice your negotiation skills and strategies with friends and family.
• learn to accept mistakes and improve on them
• know your genuine value and learn to say no whenever required.
• treat negotiation as a presentation. Improve your body language so that it will give you
a winning edge.
• be smart and strategic. It is said that let them win the first negotiation, and they will
usually be happy enough to let you win two to three more.
• define your personal strengths and use them positively to impress and convince.
TYPES OF NEGOTIATORS

Three basic kinds of negotiators have been identified by researchers involved in The Harvard
Negotiation Project.
Forsyth, 2010. There are 3 types of negotiators are
1. soft bargainers
2. hard bargainers
3. principled bargainers.
Soft
These people see negotiation as too close to competition, so they choose a gentle style of
bargaining. The offers they make are not in their best interests, they yield to others' demands,
avoid confrontation, and they maintain good relations with fellow negotiators. Their
perception of others is one of friendship, and their goal is agreement. They do not separate
the people from the problem but are soft on both. They avoid contests of wills and insist on
the agreement, offering solutions and easily trusting others and changing their opinions.
Hard
These people use contentious strategies to influence, utilizing phrases such as "this is my
final offer" and "take it or leave it". They make threats, are distrustful of others, insist on
their position, and apply pressure to negotiate. They see others as adversaries and their
ultimate goal is victory. Additionally, they search for one single answer and insist you agree
with it. They do not separate the people from the problem (as with soft bargainers), but they
are hard on both the people involved and the problem.
Principled
Individuals who bargain this way seek integrative solutions and do so by sidestepping
commitment to specific positions. They focus on the problem rather than the intentions,
motives, and needs of the people involved. They separate the people from the problem,
explore interests, avoid bottom lines, and reach results based on standards independent of
personal will. They base their choices on objective criteria rather than power, pressure, self-
interest, or an arbitrary decisional procedure. These criteria may be drawn from moral
standards, principles of fairness, professional standards, and tradition.
Researchers from The Harvard Negotiation Project recommend that negotiators explore
several tactics to reach the best solution for their problems, but this is often not the case (as
when you may be dealing with an individual using soft or hard-bargaining tactics).

SKILLS REQUIRED
Put yourself in their shoes – People tend to search for information that confirms their own
beliefs and often ignore information that contradicts prior beliefs. To negotiate effectively, it
is important to empathize with the other party's point of view. One should be open to other
views and attempt to approach an issue from the perspective of the other.
Discuss each other's perceptions – A more direct approach to understanding the other party
is to explicitly discuss each other's perceptions. Each individual should openly and honestly
share his or her perceptions without assigning blame or judgment to the other.
Find opportunities to act inconsistently with his or her views – The other party may have
prior perceptions and expectations about the other side. The other side can act in a way that
directly contradicts those preconceptions, effectively conveying that the party is interested in
an integrative negotiation.
Face-saving – This approach justifies a stance based on one's previously expressed
principles and values in a negotiation. This approach to an issue is less arbitrary, and thus, it
is more understandable from the opposing party's perspective.
Additionally, negotiators can use specific communication techniques to build stronger
relationships and develop more meaningful negotiation solutions.
Active listening – Listening is more than just hearing what the other side says. Active
listening involves paying close attention to what is being said verbally and nonverbally. It
involves periodically seeking further clarification from the person. By asking the person
exactly what they mean, they may realize you are not simply walking through a routine, but
rather take them seriously.
Speak for a purpose – Too much information can be as harmful as too little. Before
discussing an important point, determine exactly what you wish to communicate to the other
party. Determine the exact purpose that this shared information will serve

APPROACHES

I win I win
you lose You win
(it’s a deal)
I lose I lose
you lose You win

1. Distributive Negotiation or Win-Lose Approach

This is also called competitive, zero sum, or claiming value approach. This approach is
based on the premise that one person can win only at the expense of the other.
It has the following characteristics:
(i) One side ‘wins’ and one side ‘loses’.
(ii) There are fixed resources to be divided so that the more one gets, the less the
other gets.
(iii) One person’s interests oppose the other’s.
(iv) The dominant concern in this type of bargaining is usually to maximize one’s
own interests.
(v) The dominant strategies in this mode include manipulation, forcing and
withholding information.
Strategy to be used: In this mode, one seeks to gain advantage through concealing
information, misleading or using manipulative actions. Of course, these methods have
serious potential for negative consequences. Yet even in this type of negotiation, both sides
must feel that at the end the outcome was the best that they could achieve and that it is worth
accepting and supporting.
 2. Lose-Lose Approach
This negotiation approach is adopted when one negotiating partner feels that his own
interests are threatened and he does all he can to ensure that the outcome of the negotiation is
not suitable to the interests of the other party as well. In the bargain, both the parties end up
being the loser. This type of situation arises when the negotiating partners ignore one
another’s needs and the need to hurt each other outweighs the need to find some kind of an
acceptable solution. This is the most undesirable type of outcome and hence this negotiation
approach is best avoided.

3. Integrative Negotiation or Win-Win Approach

This negotiation approach is also called as collaborative or creating value approach. It is
superior to all negotiation approaches. It results in both the parties feeling that they are
achieving what they wanted. It results in satisfaction to both the parties. It has the following
characteristics.

(i) There are a sufficient amount of resources to be divided and both sides can ‘win’
(ii) The dominant concern here is to maximize joint outcomes.
(iii) The dominant strategies include cooperation, sharing information, and mutual problem-
solving. This type is also called ‘creating value’ since the goal here is to have both sides
leave the negotiating feeling they had greater value than before.

ISSUES IN NEGOTATIONS
 Personality Traits
Judgmental, over confidence, aggressive etc, have a significant impact on outcomes.
 Gender Differences
Though there is not much difference in outcomes related to male and female workers
but females exhibit less confidence in anticipation and are less satisfied with results.
 Cultural Differences
Great influencer as negotiation style differs across countries and can have positive or
negative impact on negotiation outcomes. Eg- submissive

CONSENSUS
It is a decision in which all group members find a common goal. Getting consensus does
not mean that everyone is completely satisfied with the outcome or that it was the first
choice.
Steps of Consensus
❖ Set ground rules
Set up how everyone will be included, how full participation, cooperative, how equal
voice and show commitment.
❖ State the problem
What is the issue that is causing conflict? Write a clear statement that everyone agrees
on.
❖ Voice concerns
Provide time for everyone to share their opinion and feelings about the issue.
 ❖ Brainstorm solutions
Elicit ideas from everyone in an open, non-critical environment
❖ Research & discuss
Look into the solutions proposed. Discuss the pros and cons of each.
❖ Come to a consensus
Using a preestablished form of acceptance , select the groups decision and put it into
action.
Features of Consensus Methods
Anonymity To avoid dominance, achieved by use of a
questionnaire in delphi and private ranking
in nominal group
Iteration Processes occur in rounds, allowing
individuals to change their opinions.
Controlled feedback Showing the distribution of groups response
Statistical group response Expressing judgment using summary
measures of the full group response, giving
more information than just a statement.

Advantage
 It requires sharing of information, which leads to mutual education, which in turn
provides the basis for crafting workable and acceptable alternatives.
 It promotes joint thinking of a diverse group, which leads to creative solutions.
 Because parties participate in the deliberation, they understand the reasoning behind
the chosen solution willing to support its implementation.
Disadvantage
❖ Time consuming
❖ No compromise
❖ Wrong impression
❖ Habit of consultation
❖ Not necessarily the best decision.

APPLICATION OF NEGOTIATION TO CONFLICT RESOLUTION

When two or more people or organizations disagree or have opposing Views about a
problem or solution, a conflict exists. To resolve the conflict, the involved people need to
discuss resolution in a manner that is acceptable to all of those involved. Although it does not
have to take long, in some cases it may be very long, such as what might occur in a union-
employer negotiation for a contract.
Principled negotiation can be helpful in resolving problems and conflict. It focuses on four
basic points:
(1) separate the people from the problem,
(2) focus on interests instead of positions,
(3) generate a variety of options before deciding what to do, and
(4) insist that the result be based on an objective standard
 This approach may be more successful than others because it is a mixture of hard and soft
negotiating.
 Hard approaches Focus on winning and assuming that if one waits long enough the
other side will give in.
 The soft approach focuses on prevention of conflict and concessions. In this case, the
soft negotiator does not feel positive at the end but rather is bitter Conflict resolution
includes the use of a variety of skills and strategies.
Four key needs are clarification, performance, questioning, and expectations .
As the process begins it is important to clarify all of the issues and parties who are involved
in the conflict. Performance or potential outcomes should be, established early in the process.
Questioning is important throughout resolution.
For example, it is important to ask about behaviors that started the con flict and how to avoid
them in the future. Management needs to be clear about expectations and provide these in
writing, which helps to decrease conflict over critical issues.
strategies might be used to resolve specific conflicts

❖ Help involved parties settle their differences themselves whenever possible rather than
step- ping in and taking over.
❖ Maintain an objective approach.
❖ Communicate trust to the staff and communicate that it is believed that they can
resolve problems. Avoid criticizing or denying feelings.
❖ Use a problem-solving approach.
❖ Provide privacy for sensitive discussions ldentify staff who chronically complain and
work with them to adapt their behavior as this behavior can increase the risk of
conflict and interfere with resolving it when it does occur.

Summary & conclusion

Negotiation can be a difficult process. Both sides want to achieve their own goals. Through
proper decorum and planning, the negotiation can get off to a good start in which both groups
feel at ease, and they can understand each other well.

THEORY APPLICATION
System theory was 1st proposed by Ludwig Von Bertalanffy (1901-1972).
General system theory was outlined in 1968. This theory is helpful for understanding things
like organizational behaviour, organizational change and organizational development.
Application of General System Theory
 The system theory of management asserts that any organization is a single, unified
system of interrelated parts or subsystems. Each part of the overall system is dependent on
the others and cannot function optimally without other departments.
 The organization is an open system which interacts with the environment and is
continually adapting and improving.
 The organization influences and is influenced by the environment in which it operates.
  If an organisation is to be effective, it must pay attention to the external environment
and take steps to adjust itself to accommodate the changes in order to remain relevant.
 All part of the organization is interconnected and interdependent.
If one part of the system is affected, all other parts are also gets affected. Through a
conflict resolution , negotiation methods can reduce the issues and improve.

JOURNAL REFERENCE
Conflict resolution styles in the nursing profession
Background: Managers, including those in nursing environments, may spend much of their
time addressing employee conflicts. If not handled properly, conflict may significantly affect
employee morale, increase turnover, and even result in litigation, ultimately affecting the
overall well-being of the organization. A clearer understanding of the factors that underlie
conflict resolution styles could lead to the promotion of better management strategies.

Objective: The aim of this research was to identify the predominant conflict resolution styles
used by a sample of Spanish nurses in two work settings, academic and clinical, in order to
determine differences between these environments. The effects of employment level and
demographic variables were explored as well.

Design: Descriptive cross-sectional survey study.

Participants: Our sample consisted of professional nurses in Madrid, Spain, who worked in
either a university setting or a clinical care setting. Within each of these environments, nurses
worked at one of three levels: full professor, assistant professor, or scholarship professor in
the academic setting; and nursing supervisor, registered staff nurse, or nursing assistant in the
clinical setting.

Methods: Conflict resolution style was examined using the standardized Thomas-Kilmann
Conflict Mode Instrument, a dual-choice questionnaire that assesses a respondent's
predominant style of conflict resolution. Five styles are defined: accommodating, avoiding,
collaborating, competing, and compromising. Participants were asked to give answers that
characterized their dominant response in a conflict situation involving either a superior or a
subordinate. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to examine the relationship
between workplace setting and conflict resolution style.

Results: The most common style used by nurses overall to resolve workplace conflict was
compromising, followed by competing, avoiding, accommodating, and collaborating. There
was a significant overall difference in styles between nurses who worked in an academic vs.
a clinical setting (p = 0.005), with the greatest difference seen for the accommodating style.
Of those nurses for whom accommodation was the primary style, 83% worked in a clinical
setting compared to just 17% in an academic setting.

Conclusion: Further examination of the difference in conflict-solving approaches between

academic and clinical nursing environments might shed light on etiologic factors, which in
turn might enable nursing management to institute conflict management interventions that
are tailored to specific work environments and adapted to different employment levels. This
research increases our understanding of preferred approaches to handling conflict in nursing
organizations.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Dr. Basavanthappa B.T, “Nursing Administration”, 1st Edition, JP Brothers,
NewDelhi, 2003; page no 362-377 and 462- 473 2.
2. B.M. Sakharkr, “Principles of hospital Administration and Planning” JP Brothers, New
Delhi, 1998; page no 185-190. 3.
3. Kunders GD, “Designing for total quality in health care”, Prism Book Pvt Limited.
Bangalore, 2002; page no 37-96.
4. B.M Sakharkar, principles of hospital administration and planning, 8th edition, 2022
5. Jaypee brothers’ medical publishers(p)Ltd New Delhi, page no: 97-105
6. . S. P. Ranga Rao, ―Administration of primary health centres in India‖, 9th edition,
2020, Mittal Publications, New Delhi.
7. Lucita M. Nursing: Practice and public health administration. Current concepts and
trends. New Delhi: B. I. Churchill Livingstone Pvt. Ltd.; 2020.
8. Deepak K.A comphrensive textbook of nursing management.Bangalore. Emmess
Medical Publishers, New Delhi.2013.58-60

JOURNAL REFERENCE

Losa Iglesias ME,Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo R. Conflict resolution styles in the nursing
profession Contemp Nurse.2012Dec;43(1):73-80.
 Management

Seminar plan on
Conflict –
Negotiation &
Consensus
Submitted to Submitted by
Dr.Padmavathy Nagarajan R.Thamilselvi
Assistant Professor M.Sc(N) II year
CON, JIPMER CON, JIPMER