Conflict Management

2. Nature of Conflict

Dr. Javed Mahmud

September 2022
Definition of Conflict
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

March and Simon

Conflict is a breakdown in the standard mechanisms (মানসম্মত
প্রক্রিয়া) of decision making, so that an individual or group Too narrow
experiences difficulty in selecting an alternative (বিকল্প)
Louis R. Pondy
Organizational conflict can best be understood as a dynamic Too board
process (গতিশীল প্রক্রিয়া) underlying organizational behaviour
Definition of Conflict
David L. Austin
A disagreement (মতবিরোধ) between two or more individuals or groups, with each individual or
group trying to gain acceptance (গ্রহণযোগ্যতা অর্জ ন) of its views or objectives over others

Tedeschi, Tedeschi and Bonoma

Conflict is an interactive state (এমন একটা দশা যা একে অপরকে প্রভাবিত করে) in which the behaviours or
goals of one actor are to some degree incompatible (বেমানান) with the behaviours or goals of some
other actor or actors

It is understood from their exposition that “actor” refers to any social entity, from the individual to
the corporate body itself

C.G. Smith
Conflict is a situation in which the conditions, practices, or goals for the different participants are
inherently incompatible (সহজাতভাবে বেমানান)
Definition of Conflict
Although the definitions are not identical, they overlap with respect to the
following elements:
1. Conflict includes opposing interests (বিরোধী স্বার্থ) between individuals or
groups in a zero-sum situation
2. Such opposed interests must be recognized for conflict to exist
3. Conflict involves beliefs, by each side, that the other will thwart (ব্যাঘাত ঘটানো)
(or has already thwarted) its interests
4. Actions by one or both sides do, in fact, produce thwarting of others’ goals
5. 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
 Definition of Conflict

Conflict is defined as an interactive process showed in incompatibility

(অসংগতি), disagreement (মতভেদ), or dissonance (অনৈক্য) within or between
social entities (i.e., individual, group, organization, etc.)
Threshold of Conflict
 Conflict does not necessarily occur simply because there are incompatibilities
(অসঙ্গতি), disagreements (মতবিরোধ), or differences (পার্থক্য) within or between
social entities
 In order for conflict to occur, it has to exceed the threshold (সীমা) 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
 There are differences in the threshold of conflict awareness or tolerance
among individuals
 Thus, some individuals may become involved in a conflict sooner than others
under similar situations
Threshold of Conflict
 According to Giuseppe Ando
 a conflict never erupts suddenly, it is never something completely unexpected
 there are 4 levels of progressive confusion of the conflict

Concluded
Felt Level
Perceivable Level
Level
Latent
Level
 Threshold of Conflict
• Escapes most people, often even the interested parties themselves
• Small signs of disagreement, in an atmosphere of apparent positive intent
Latent • Outside the contexts dedicated to confrontation and discussion, parties tend
Level to minimize the opportunities for meeting and limit the relationship to a
measured exchange of formal kindness and courtesy
• The problem is maturing, but no one feels it exists
• Parties realize that the conflict is no longer to be considered an occasional
Perceivable fact, but belongs to the constant modality with which they relate
Level • They sense the hostility (বৈরভাব) of "the other" and feed their own
• Hostility is also perceptible in occasional meetings (dining area, corridor, etc.)
• Attitudes begin to be perceptible even to observers
 Threshold of Conflict
• High emotional impact stage
• Conflicting parties, when they have to meet, live the moment with great
anxiety (উদ্বেগ)
Felt Level
• The stress (মানসিক চাপ) of conflict consumes most of their energy
• Observers are also involved in the negative climate and witness with serious
unease the quarrels and tensions between the parties
• The confrontation is open, out of control and in the public domain
• The parties to the dispute exchange insults, accusations and threats
Concluded • It is practically impossible for the parties to be present in the same place
Level without the controversy raging
• The existence of the conflict also involves the colleagues and collaborators of
the parties, and is well known from the higher levels
 Conflict and Competition
There are three major distinctions in the conceptualization (ধারণা) of
conflict and competition

• Conflict is a subset of competition

Consideration • All situations of incompatibility (অসঙ্গতি) lead to competition, but
of Boulding conflict occurs when the parties become aware of the incompatibility
(1962) and wish to interfere with the attainment (অর্জ ন) of each other’s goal
fulfilments
• In this sense, golf is a competitive game; football, a conflictual one
Consideration
of Mack • Competitive behaviour is regulated by rules and norms, whereas
(1965) conflictual behaviour is not
 Conflict and Competition
• Conflicts may be placed along a continuum of cooperative to competitive
• Purely cooperative conflicts (positive-sum games) occur in such situations
where two both individuals or units are trying to ensure a mutually
profitable outcome for both. The problem is simply one of coordination—
of establishing who does what
Consideration • Purely competitive conflicts (negative-sum games) occur when the positive
of Thibaut & outcomes to one party are directly and equally matched by negative
Kelley, 1959) outcomes to the other as a result of their joint choices from interaction. An
organizational illustration is that of promotion, where two candidates are
eligible but only one can be upgraded.
• Mixed-motive conflicts are most encountered in real life. Majority of
conflicts are characterized by both cooperative and competitive aspects.
Most managerial conflicts are mixed-motive in nature
 Classifying Conflicts

Source of Level of
Conflict Analysis
• Conflict is often classified on the • Conflict may be classified on the
basis of the conditions that lead basis of levels at which it occurs
to it
 Classifying Conflicts (Source of
Conflict)
1. Affective • This occurs when two interacting social entities, while trying to solve a problem
Conflict together, become aware that their feelings (অনুভূ তি ) and emotions (আবেগ) regarding
some or all the issues are incompatible (Guetzkow & Gyr, 1954).
• This category of conflict has been labelled psychological conflict, relationship conflict,
emotional conflict and interpersonal conflict
2. Substantive • This occurs when two or more organizational members disagree on their task or
Conflict content issues (Guetzkow & Gyr, 1954)
• This type of conflict has also been labelled task conflict, cognitive conflict and issue
conflict
• Jehn (1997b) characterized this type of conflict as “disagreements among group
members’ ideas and opinions about the task being performed, such as disagreement
regarding the correct data to include in a report”
It is appropriate to distinguish between substantive and 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
 Classifying Conflicts (Source of
Conflict)
3. Conflict of • An inconsistency between two parties in their preferences for the allocation
Interest of a scarce resource
• 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” (Druckman & Zechmeister, 1973)
4. Conflict of • Occurs when two social entities differ in their values or ideologies on certain
Values issues
• Also called ideological conflict
• The ideological disagreement between two supervisors on the question of
“compensatory hiring” is an example of value conflict
5. Goal Conflict • A conflict where an individual or a group has to compromise its goals for the
achievement of organizational goals
• Work-life-balance is also an example of goal conflict
 Classifying Conflicts (Source of
Conflict)
6. Realistic • The former refers to incompatibilities that have rational content (i.e., tasks,
versus goals, values, and means and ends) while nonrealistic conflict occurs as a
Nonrealistic result of a party’s need for releasing tension and expressing hostility,
Conflict 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
group or organizational goals” (Ross & Ross, 1989)
• Nonrealistic conflict often include 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)
 Classifying Conflicts (Source of
Conflict)
7. Institutionalized • The former is characterized by situations in which actors follow explicit rules,
versus and display predictable behaviour, and their relationship has continuity, as in
Noninstitutionalized the case of line–staff conflict or labour–management negotiations
Conflict • Most racial conflict is noninstitutionalized where these three conditions are
non-existent
8. Retributive Conflict • 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 (Saaty, 1990)
9. Misattributed Conflict • Relates to the incorrect assignment of causes (behaviours, parties, or issues)
to conflict (Deutsch, 1977)
• 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
 Classifying Conflicts (Levels of
Analysis)
Intraorganizational Conflict Interorganizational Conflict
(conflict within an (conflict between two or
organization) more organizations)

Interpersonal
Intrapersonal Conflict Intragroup Intergroup
Conflict Conflict Conflict
 Classifying Conflicts (Levels of
Analysis)
1. Intrapersonal • Also known as intraindividual or intrapsychic conflict
Conflict • 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
2. Interpersonal • Also known as dyadic conflict
Conflict • Refers to conflict between two or more organizational members of the same
or different hierarchical levels or units
• Superior–subordinate conflict relate to this type of conflict.
3. Intragroup • Also known as intradepartmental conflict
Conflict • Refers to conflict among members of a group or between two or more
subgroups within a group
• May also occur between members of a group and its leader(s)
4. Intergroup • Also known as interdepartmental conflict
Conflict • Refers to conflict between two or more units or groups within an organization
• Examples are conflicts between, production and marketing, labour and
management
Classifying Conflicts
 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
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Model of Two Style
Deutsch (1949) Knudson, Sommers
and Golding (1980)
Cooperation Engagement
সহযোগিতা যোগাযোগ

Competition Avoidance
প্রতিযোগিতা এড়ানো

• In managerial settings, one hardly encounters purely cooperative or purely

competitive conflict situations
• Most conflicts are characterized by both cooperative and competitive aspects
• A cooperative relationship is more effective than a competitive relationship in
managing conflict
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Model of Three Style

Putnam and Lawrence and Billingham and Rands, Levinger, and

Wilson (1982) Lorsch (1967) Sack (1987) Mellinger (1981)
• Nonconfrontation • Forcing • Reasoning • Attack
মুকাবিলা না করা জোর করা যুক্তি আক্রমণ

• Solution-orientation • Smoothing • Verbal aggression • Avoid

সমাধান প্রবণতা শান্ত করা মৌখিক আগ্রাসন এড়ান

• Control (dominating) • Confrontation • Violence • Compromise

নিয়ন্ত্রণ মুকাবিলা করা বল আপস করা
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Model of Four Style

Pruitt (1983) Kurdek (1994)

• Yielding • Problem solving

সমর্পণ করা সমস্যা সমাধান করা

• Problem Solving • Conflict engagement

সমস্যা সমাধান করা বিবাদ

• Inaction • Withdrawal
নিষ্ক্রিয়তা প্রত্যাহার

• Contending • Compliance
প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বিতা বশ্যতা
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Model of Five Style

Mary P. Follett (1940) Blake and Mouton (1964)

• Domination • Forcing
আধিপত্য জোর করা
• Compromise • Withdrawing
আপস প্রত্যাহার করা
• Integration • Smoothing
সহায়তা শান্ত করা
• Avoidance • Compromising
এড়ানো আপস করা
• Suppression • Problem Solving
চাপা দেওয়া সমস্যা সমাধান করা
Styles of
Handling
Conflict
Model of Five Style
Styles of
Handling Conflict
Styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict
Rahim and Bonoma (1979)
 differentiated the styles of handling interpersonal conflict on two
basic dimensions:
 concern for self - explains the degree (high or low) to which a person
attempts to satisfy his or her own concern
 concern for others - explains the degree (high or low) to which a person
wants to satisfy the concern of others
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Rahim and Bonoma (1979)
1. Integrating Style
 Indicates high concern for self and others
 Also known as problem solving
 Involves collaboration between the parties (i.e., openness, exchange of information,
and examination of differences to reach a solution acceptable to both parties)
 “a process through which parties who see different aspects of a problem can
constructively explore their differences and search for solutions that go beyond their
own limited vision of what is possible” (Gray 1989)
 This style has two distinctive elements:
 confrontation –which involves open communication, clearing up misunderstanding,
and analysing the underlying causes of conflict
 problem solving - which involves identification of, and solution to, the real
problem(s) to provide maximum satisfaction of concerns of both parties.
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Rahim and Bonoma (1979)
2. Obliging Style
 Indicates low concern for self and high concern for others
 Also known as accommodating
 Associated with attempting to play down the differences and emphasizing
commonalities to satisfy the concern of the other party
 There is an element of self-sacrifice in this style
 It may take the form of selfless generosity, charity, or obedience to another
party’s order
 An obliging person neglects his or her own concern to satisfy the concern of
the other party
 Such an individual is like a “conflict absorber”
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Rahim and Bonoma (1979)
3. Dominating Style
 Indicates high concern for self and low concern for others
 Also known as competing
 Identified with a win–lose orientation or with forcing behaviour to win one’s
position
 A dominating or competing person goes all out to win his or her objective and,
as a result, often ignores the needs and expectations of the other party
 Sometimes a dominating person wants to win at any cost
 A person who does not possess formal position power may wield power by
deceit, bluff, bringing in superiors, and so on
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Rahim and Bonoma (1979)
4. Avoiding Style
 Indicates low concern for self and others
 Also known as suppression, associated with withdrawal, or “see no evil, hear no evil,
speak no evil” situations
 May take the form of postponing an issue until a better time, or simply withdrawing from
a threatening situation
 An avoiding person fails to satisfy his or her own concern as well as the concern of the
other party
 This style is often characterized as an unconcerned attitude toward the issues or
parties involved in conflict
 Such a person may refuse to acknowledge in public that there is a conflict that should
be dealt with
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Rahim and Bonoma (1979)
5. Compromising Style
 Indicates intermediate concern for self and others
 Involves a give and-take or sharing whereby both parties give up something to make a
mutually acceptable decision
 It may mean splitting the difference, exchanging concession, or seeking a quick,
middle-ground position
 A compromising party gives up more than a dominating party but less than an obliging
party
 Likewise, such a party addresses an issue more directly than an avoiding party but
does not explore it in as much depth as an integrating party
Styles of Handling Conflict
Integrative and Distributive
Dimensions of labour–management
bargaining
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Integrative and Distributive Dimensions
Further insights into the five styles of handling interpersonal conflict may be
obtained by organizing them according to the integrative and distributive
dimensions of labour–management bargaining
Integrative (integrating–avoiding) Dimensions
• Represents the extent (high or low) of satisfaction of concerns received by self and others
• The integrating style attempts to increase the satisfaction of the concerns of both parties by
finding unique solutions to the problems acceptable to them
• The avoiding style leads to the reduction of satisfaction of the concerns of both parties as a
result of their failure to confront and solve their problems
• Represents the amount of satisfaction of concerns received by both parties (i.e., self and
others)
• May be considered as the problem-solving dimension
• Used to deal with strategic or complex conflicts
 Styles of Handling Conflict
Integrative and Distributive Dimensions
Distributive (dominating–obliging) Dimensions
• Represents the amount of satisfaction of the concerns received by one of the parties (i.e., self
or others)
• May be considered as the dimension of bargaining
• Used to deal with conflict involving routine matters
• Represents the ratio of the satisfaction of concerns received by self and others
• The dominating style attempts to obtain high satisfaction of concerns for self (and provide low
satisfaction of concerns for others)
• The obliging style attempts to obtain low satisfaction of concerns for self (and provide high
satisfaction of concerns for others)
• The compromising style represents the point of intersection of the two dimensions, that is, a
middle-ground position where both parties receive an intermediate level of satisfaction of their
concerns from the resolution of their conflicts
• Some Management Gurus ignore it
Sample Questions
1. How can conflicts be classified according to their source?
2.* Differentiate between the Classifications of conflict based on the levels of
analysis
3.* Explain the 5 styles of handling conflict described by Rahim and Bonoma
4. Distinguish between the integrative and distributive dimensions of
bargaining
Q &A