CHAPTER FIVE

5. CONFLICT

5.1. A DEFINITION OF CONFLICT

Conflict refers to a disagreement or clash of interests, values, or actions

between individuals, groups, or organizations.

5.2 Causes of conflict

Causes of conflict explaining intergroup conflict. This can be summarized as follows:

 Scarcity of resources (finance, equipment, facilities, etc)

 Different attitudes, values or perceptions

 Disagreements about needs, goals, priorities and interests

 Poor communication

 Poor or inadequate organizational structure

 Lack of teamwork

 Lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities

Descriptions of some of the most common organizational causes of conflict may be:

 Competition for resources

 Task interdependence
 Jurisdictional ambiguity
 Status struggles

There are also many other potential sources of organizational conflict, including:
 Individual – such as attitudes, personality characteristics or particular personal needs, illness
or stress;
 Group – such as group skills, the informal organization and groups norms;
 Organization – such as communications, authority structure, leadership style, managerial
behavior;

The age gap – relationship between older employees and younger managers, where
experience is on one side and power on the other, can lead to conflict

Consequences of Conflict
POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES
 Leads to new ideas  Diverts energy from work
 Stimulates creativity  Wastes resources
 Motivates change  Creates a negative climate
 Promotes organizational vitality  Breaks down group cohesion
 Helps individuals and groups establish  threatens psychological well-
identities being
 Serves as a safety value to indicate  Can increase hostility and aggressive
problems behaviours

5.3 PERSPECTIVES ON CONFLICT

1. The traditional/unitarist view:- One school of thought has argued that conflict must be
avoided, that it indicates a malfunction within the group. We call this the traditional view.
 Hawthorne, it was argued that conflict was a dysfunctional out-come resulting from
poor communication, a lack of openness and trust between people, and the failure of
managers to be responsive to the needs and aspirations of their employees.
 1930s and 1940s
2. The human relation/pluralist view argues that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome
in any group. It need not be evil, but rather has the potential to be a positive force in
determining group performance.
 Win-win solutions.
 Managed and resolved through effective communication, negotiation, and
collaboration.
 190-1970
3. The interactionist/radicalist view argues that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome in
any group. It need not be evil, but rather has the potential to be a positive force in
determining group performance.

5.4 TYPES OF CONFLICT: FUNCTIONAL and DYSFUNCTIONAL CONFLICTS

Some conflicts support the goals of the group and improve its performance; these are
functional, constructive forms of conflict.

There are also conflicts that hinder group performance; these are dysfunctional or
destructive forms.

5.5 THE CONFLICT PROCESS – STAGES OF CONFLICT

The conflict process can be thought of as progressing through four stages: potential
opposition, cognition and personalization, behaviour, and outcomes.
 1. potential opposition
have been condensed into three general categories:
I. communication,
II. structure, and
III. personal variables.

Five conflict-handling approaches are typically available:

1. Competition,
2. Collaboration,
3. Avoidance,
4. Accommodation, and
5. Compromise

5.6 Level of conflict

Level On basis intra-organizational conflict may be classified as

Individual conflict

 Intrapersonal,
 Interpersonal,

Group conflict

 Intra-group, and
 Intergroup.

Intra-personal Conflict

• Intra-personal conflicts arise within individuals due to frustration, goals, and roles.

• There are three types of intrapersonal conflict. Following is a discussion of these three
types:

A. Approach–approach conflict=both positive alternatives

B. Avoidance–avoidance conflict=Both negative alternatives

C. Approach–avoidance conflict =positive and negative alternatives

II. Inter-personal Conflict: occurs between two individuals or between an individual and a
group.
III. Intra-group Conflict: is the conflicts that occur between group members.

IV. Inter-group Conflict: occurs between two or more groups in an organization - work groups,
social groups, etc.

5.7 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT APPROACHES

a. Interpersonal conflict handling styles

Interpersonal conflict refers to a disagreement or clash between two or more individuals.

There are different ways to handle interpersonal conflict, and the following are five possible
approaches:

1. Avoidance: This is a conflict handling style where the parties involved try to avoid the
conflict. This approach is characterized by the reluctance to confront the issues or differences
in order to maintain harmony or avoid confrontation. This style is not effective in resolving
conflicts as it does not address the underlying problem.

2. Smoothing/Obliging: This style is characterized by a willingness to minimize differences

between the parties by focusing on areas of agreement and de-emphasizing areas of
disagreement. This approach may be effective in situations where the relationship is more
important than the outcome.

3. Compromising: This style involves both parties giving up something in order to come to a
mutually agreeable solution. This approach requires flexibility and the ability to
communicate effectively. This style can be effective when both parties have equal power in
the situation.

4. Collaborating: This style is characterized by a win-win approach where the parties

involved work together to come up with a mutually beneficial solution. This approach
requires open communication, empathy, and a willingness to listen. This style is effective
when the outcome is important and the parties involved have equal power.

5. Competing/forcing: This style is characterized by a win-lose approach where one party

asserts their needs or goals above the other. This approach may be effective in situations
when a quick decision is necessary or when one party has more power than the other.
However, this approach may damage relationships and lead to increased conflict in the long-
term..

1. Avoidance:

- Win-Win:

If both parties agree to avoid the conflict, there may be no short-term consequences.
- Lose-Lose:

However, over time, avoiding conflict can lead to resentment and negative feelings that can
damage the relationship between parties.

2. Smoothing/Obliging:

- Win-Win:

This approach may work well when the outcome is not very important and preserving the
relationship is of greater importance.

- Win-Lose:

The party that obliges, may be giving up their own needs in order to satisfy or please the other
party.

3. Compromising:

- Win-Win:

In a compromise, both parties give up something in order to reach a mutually acceptable

solution.

- Lose-Lose:

However, if the compromise is not satisfactory, both parties may end up feeling like they have
given up too much to reach the agreement.

4. Collaborating:

- Win-Win:

Collaborating offers the opportunity for both parties to work together to create a mutually
beneficial solution.

- Win-Lose:

However, if a collaborative solution cannot be agreed upon, neither party will be satisfied.

5. Competing:

- Win-Lose:

In competing, one party is likely to win while the other loses.

- Lose-Lose: Additionally, if the person who lost becomes resentful, then neither party will be
happy with the outcome in the long-term
 CHAPTER 6
6. ORGANIZATIONAL POWER, POLITICS

6.1 THE MEANING OF POWER

 Power is “the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to
carry out his own will despite resistance.”

 Power is a “measure of a person’s potential to get others to do what he or she wants them to
do as well as to avoid being forced to do what he or she does not want to do.”

 Power is the ability to produce intended effects in line with one’s perceived interests.

 Power is the ability of individuals or groups to induce or influence the beliefs or actions of
other persons or groups.

 Power is the ability to get things done despite the will & resistance of others or the ability to
“win” political fights & outmanoeuvre the opposition.

 Power is a potential force and in more detail “as the potential ability to influence behaviour,
to change the course of events, to overcome resistance, and to get people to do things they
would not otherwise do.”

 Power is the capacity of a person, team, or organisation to influence others. Power is not the
act of changing others’ attitudes or behaviour; but the potential to do so.

THE DISTINCTION AMONG AUTHORITY, POWER, AND INFLUENCE

AUTHORITY POWER INFLUENCE

Generally associated with
formal organisations.
Authority legitimises & is
a source of power.
It is a form of power
vested in formal
managerial or
administrative positions
that gives the position
holder the right to
influence behaviour &
Generalised ability endowed Refers to the act or art of
in an individual to influence affecting the attitudes &
the action of others. It is a behaviour of a person or group
broader concept than by another person or group.
authority.
Power need not be legitimate. Influence flows from power. It is
inoperative without some form of
power.
Bases of power other than Influence is more closely
authority operate & become associated with leadership than
effective in non-formal power is, but both obviously are
situations also. involved in the leadership
process.
demand compliance.
It has rational legal
implications
Impersonally vested in the
job; flows from the
position.
Authority can be delegated
More structured in
organisations & governed
by several due processes,
procedures & constraints.
Flows downwards; can be
exercised in a well-
defined, functional manner
only
Authority & responsibility
go together
Compliance to authority or
to the exercise of authority
is mandatory in
organisational situations.
Power may or may not have Influence is usually conceived of
rational legal implications as being broader in scope than
power because it involves the
Bases of power such as ability to alter other people in
charisma, knowledge, & general ways, such as by
reference have personalised changing their satisfaction &
bases. performance.
Power based on sources other
than authority for example
cannot be delegated.
Some forms of power are less
structured, more flexible and
open, flow in all directions
(up, down or sideways); there
are no fixed superiors &
subordinates
Sense of responsibility, in
case of other forms of power
may or may not co-exist
In the case of some other
bases of power, compliance
is not mandatory

6.2 BASES OF POWER

Leaders in organizations typically rely on some or all of five major types of power:

1. legitimate,
2. reward,
3. coercive,
4. expert
5. referent.

The first three power bases are derived from the power holder’s position; that is, the person
receives these power bases because of the specific authority or roles he or she is assigned in the
organisation.

The latter two sources of power originate from the power holder’s own characteristics. In other
words, people bring these power bases to the organisation.
SOURCES OF POWER IN ORGANISATIONS & CONTINGENCIES OF
POWER

Sources of
power
Power over
 Legitimate
others
 Reward
 Coercive Contingencies
 Expert of power
 Referent

 Substitutability
 Centrality

1. Legitimate power is an agreement among organisational members that people in certain

roles can request specific behaviour of others.
2. Reward power is derived from the person’s ability to control the allocation of rewards
valued by others and to remove negative sanctions (i.e., negative reinforcement).
3. Coercive power (in the organisational context) is the ability to apply punishment.
4. Referent power is held by people when others identify with them, like them, or otherwise
respect them.
5. Expert power originates from within the person. It is an individual’s or work unit’s capacity
to influence others by possessing knowledge or skills they want.