UNIT FIVE: CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND NEGOTIATION

What is conflict?
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. Organizational conflict is the clash that
occurs when the goal-directed behavior of one group blocks the goals of another. Because the goals,
preferences, and interests of stakeholder groups differ, conflict is inevitable in organizations. Although
conflict is often perceived as something negative, research suggests that some conflict is good for an
organization and can improve organizational effectiveness.
Transitions in Conflict Thought
1. The Traditional View: The early approach to conflict assumed that all conflict was bad. Conflict was
viewed negatively, and it was used synonymously with such terms as violence, destruction, and
irrationality to reinforce its negative connotation. Conflict, by definition, was harmful and was to be
avoided.
2. The Human Relations View: The human relations position argued that conflict was a natural
occurrence in all groups and organizations. Since conflict was inevitable, the human relations school
advocated acceptance of conflict. Proponents rationalized its existence: It cannot be eliminated, and there
are even times when conflict may benefit a group’s performance.
3. The Interactionist View: The interactionist view of conflict believes that conflict is not only a positive
force in a group but that it is absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively. While the human
relations approach accepted conflict, the interactionist approach encourages conflict on the grounds that
a harmonious, peaceful, tranquil, and cooperative group is prone to becoming static, apathetic, and non-
responsive to needs for change and innovation. The major contribution of the interactionist approach,
therefore, is encouraging group leaders to maintain an ongoing minimum level of conflict - enough to
keep the group viable, self-critical, and creative.
Outcomes of Conflicts
Not all conflicts are bad. In fact, some types of conflict encourage new solutions to problems and enhance
the creativity in the organizations.
- Functional conflict is a conflict that supports the goals of the group and improves its performance.
Dysfunctional conflict is conflict that hinders group performance.
Why is some conflict good for an organization?
Conflict can be beneficial because it can overcome organizational inertia and lead to organizational learning
and change. Conflict between different managers or between different stakeholder groups can improve
decision making and organizational learning by revealing new ways of looking at a problem. Beyond a
certain level, however, conflict stops being a force for good and becomes cause of organizational decline.
Dysfunctional conflict can reduce productivity, decrease morale, cause overwhelming dissatisfaction, and
increase tension and stress in the organization.

1
 The Conflict Process
The conflict process can be seen as comprising five stages: potential opposition or incompatibility, cognition
and personalization, intentions, behavior, and outcomes.

Stage I Stage II
Cognition and
Stage III Stage IV Stage V
Potential opposition
Intentions Behavior Outcomes
or incompatibility personalization Increased
Conflict-handling group
Perceived Overt conflict
intentions performanc
Antecedent conditions conflict Party’s
Competing e
Communication behavior
Structure Collaborating Other’s
Felt Decreased
Personal Variables Compromising reaction
conflict group
Avoiding
performanc
Accommodating
e

The Conflict Process, Robbins,S.P 1998: 437

STAGE I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility
The first step in the conflict process is the presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to
arise. They need not lead directly to conflict, but one of these conditions is necessary if conflict is to arise.
STAGE II: Cognition and personalization
If the conditions cited in Stage I negatively affect something that one party cares about, then the potential for
opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized in the second stage.
Perceived conflict is awareness by one or more parties of the existence of conditions that create
opportunities for conflict to arise.
Felt conflict is emotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety, tenseness, frustration, or hostility.
STAGE III: Intentions
Intentions are decisions to act in a given way in a conflict episode. Intentions intervene between people's
perceptions and emotions and their overt behavior.
Conflict Handling Intentions
Assertiv

Competing Collaborating
e
Assertiveness

C
Compromising
Unassertive

Avoiding Accommodating

Uncooperative Cooperative
Cooperativeness

2
Using two dimension __cooperativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party's
concerns) and assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) –
five conflict-handling intentions can be identified.
i. Competing: A desire to satisfy one's interests, regardless of the impact on the other party to the
conflict.
ii. Collaborating: A situation where the parties to a conflict each desire to satisfy fully the concerns of
all parties.
iii. Avoiding: The desire to withdraw from or suppress a conflict.
iv. Accommodating: The willingness of one party in a conflict to place the opponent's interests above
his or her own.
v. Compromising: A situation in which each party to a conflict is willing to give up something.
STAGE IV: Behavior
 At this stage conflict becomes visible. The behavior stage includes the statements, actions, and
reactions made by the conflicting parties. These conflict behaviors are usually overt attempts to
implement each party's intentions
STAGE V: Outcomes
The conflict outcomes may be functional in that the conflict results in an improvement in the group's
performance, or dysfunctional in that it hinders group performance.
Functional outcomes: Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions, stimulates
creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group members, provides the medium
through which problems can be aired and tensions released, and fosters an environment of self –evaluation
and change.
Dysfunctional outcomes: Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties,
and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.
Conflict Management Techniques
If a conflict is dysfunctional, what can the parties do to deescalate it? Or, conversely, what options exist if
conflict is too low and needs to be increased? This brings us to conflict management techniques. The
following section lists the major resolution and stimulation techniques that allow managers to control
conflict levels.
Conflict Resolution Techniques
1. Problem solving: Face-to-face meeting of the conflicting parties for the purpose of identifying the
problem and solving it through open discussion.
2. Superordinate goals: Creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the cooperation of each of
the conflicting parties.
3. Expansion of resources: When a conflict is caused by the scarcity of a resource __ say, money, promotion
opportunities, office space__ expansion of the resource can create a win-win solution.
4. Avoidance: Withdrawal from, or suppression of the conflict

3
5. Smoothing: Playing down differences while emphasizing common interests between the conflicting
parties.
6. Compromise: Each party to the conflict gives up something of value.
7. Authoritative command: Management uses its formal authority to resolve the conflict and then
communicates its desires to the parties involved.
8. Altering the human variable: Using behavioral change techniques such as human relations training to
alter attitudes and behaviors that cause conflict.
9. Altering the structural variables: changing the formal organization structure and the interaction patterns
of conflicting parties through job redesign, transfers, creation of coordinating positions, and the like
Conflict Stimulation Techniques
1. Communication: Using ambiguous or threatening messages to increase conflict levels.
2. Bringing in outsiders: Adding employees to a group whose backgrounds, values, attitudes, or
managerial styles differ from those of present members.
3. Restructuring the organization: realigning work groups, altering rules and regulations, increasing
interdependence, and making similar structural changes to disrupt the status quo.
4. Appointing a devil's advocate: Designating a critic to purposely argue against the majority positions
held by the group.

NEGOTIATION
Negotiation is the process by which the parties to a conflict define what they are willing to give and accept
in an exchange.
Negotiation Strategies: There are two general approaches to negotiation distributive negotiation and
__

integrative negotiations
Distributive negotiation is negotiation under the assumption that gains for one party will come at the
expense of the other party; a win –lose strategy It seeks to divide up a fixed amount of resources. Its most
identifying feature is that it operates under zero –sum conditions.
Integrative negotiation is negotiation that seeks to give both parties what they want; a win –win strategy.
Integrative negotiators may have to redefine the options to expand the amount of resources available for
resolving the conflict. As they work together, they view the situation as one in which they have a shared
interest in finding a mutually beneficial solution. This approach tends to support a positive long-term
relationship between the negotiators.

4
Distributive vs. Integrative Negotiation
Negotiation Distributive Integrative
Characteristic Negotiation Negotiation
Available resources Fixed amount of Variable amount of
resources to be divided resources to be
divided
Primary motivations I win, you lose I win, you win
Primary interests Opposed to each other Convergent or
congruent with each other
Focus of relationships Short term Long term

The negotiation process has five steps:

Preparation Definition of Clarification Bargaining Closure

and planning ground rules and justification and problem and
solving implementation

Third-Party Negotiations:
When individuals and groups reach a stalemate and are unable to resolve their differences through direct
negotiations, especially when a conflict is emotionally charged, they may turn to a third party to help them
find a solution. There are four basic third-party roles: mediator, arbitrator, conciliator, and consultant.
A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using reasoning, persuasion, and
suggestions for alternatives. For mediation to succeed:
1. The conflicting parties must be motivated to bargain and resolve their conflict.
2. The conflict intensity should not be too high. Mediation is most effective under moderate levels of
conflict.
3. The mediator must be perceived as neutral and non-coercive
 An arbitrator is a third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an agreement.
 Arbitration can be voluntary (requested) or compulsory (forced on the parties by law or contract).
 A conciliator is a trusted third party who provides an informal communication link between the
negotiator and the opponent.
 A consultant is an impartial third party, skilled in conflict management, who attempts to facilitate
creative problem solving through communication and analysis. In contrast to the previous roles, the
consultant's role is not to settle the issues but, rather, to improve relations between the conflicting
parties so that they can reach a settlement themselves.
5
6