Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1-1
Conflict Defined
11-2
Is Conflict Good or Bad?:
Pre 1970s View
Good
Historically, experts viewed
conflict as dysfunctional
• Undermined relations
Conflict outcomes
• Wasted human energy
• More job dissatisfaction, 0
turnover, stress
• Less productivity,
information sharing
Bad
Low Level of conflict High
11-3
Is Conflict Good or Bad?: 1970s-
1990s View
Good Optimal
1970s to 1990s – belief in an
conflict
optimal level of conflict
Conflict outcomes
Some level of conflict is good
because:
• Energizes debate 0
• Reexamine assumptions
• Improves responsiveness
to external environment
• Increases team cohesion
Bad
Low Level of conflict High
11-4
Is Conflict Good or Bad?:
Emerging View
Two types of conflict
• Constructive conflict -- Conflict is aimed at issue,
not parties
• Relationship conflict -- Conflict is aimed at
undermining the other party
11-5
Is Conflict Good or Bad?:
Emerging View
Good
Goal: encourage
Constructive
constructive conflict, conflict
minimize relationship
Conflict outcomes
conflict
Problem: difficult to 0
separate constructive from
relationship conflict Relationship
conflict
• Drive to defend activated
when ideas are critiqued
Bad
Low Level of conflict High
11-6
Constructive Confrontation at Intel
11-7
Minimizing Relationship Conflict
11-8
The Conflict Process
Conflict
Perceptions
Sources of Manifest Conflict
Conflict Conflict Outcomes
Conflict
Emotions
Conflict
Escalation Cycle
11-9
Structural Sources of Conflict
• Different values/beliefs
Differentiation • Explains cross-cultural and generational
conflict
more
11-10
Structural Sources of Conflict
• Increases stereotyping
Communication • Reduces motivation to communicate
Problems
• Escalates conflict when arrogant
11-11
Five Conflict Handling Styles
High
Forcing Problem-solving
Assertiveness
Compromising
Avoiding Yielding
Low High
Cooperativeness
11-12
Conflict Handling Contingencies
Problem solving
• Best when:
- Interests are not perfectly opposing
- Parties have trust/openness
- Issues are complex
• Problem: other party take advantage of information
Forcing
• Best when:
- you have a deep conviction about your position
- quick resolution required
- other party would take advantage of cooperation
• Problems: relationship conflict, long-term relations
11-13
Conflict Handling Contingencies
Avoiding
• Best when:
- relationship conflict is high
- conflict resolution cost is higher than benefits
• Problems: doesn’t resolve conflict, frustration
Yielding
• Best when:
- other party has much more power
- issue is much less important to you than other party
- value/logic of your position is imperfect
• Problem: Increases other party’s expectations
11-14
Conflict Handling Contingencies
Compromising
• Best when…
- Parties have equal power
- Quick solution is required
- Parties lack trust/openness
• Problem: Sub-optimal solution where mutual gains
are possible
11-15
Structural Approaches to Conflict
Resolution
1. Emphasizing superordinate goals
• Emphasize common objective rather than
conflicting sub-goals
• Reduces goal incompatibility and differentiation
2. Reducing differentiation
• Remove sources of different values and beliefs
- e.g. Move employees around to different jobs
11-16
Structural Approaches to Conflict
Resolution (con’t)
3. Improving communication/understanding
• Employees understand and appreciate each other’s
views through communication
- Relates to contact hypothesis
11-17
Structural Approaches to Conflict
Resolution (con’t)
4. Reduce Task Interdependence
5. Increase Resources
• Duplicate resources
11-18
Resolving Conflict Through
Negotiation
Which conflict handling style is best in
negotiation?
• Begin cautiously with problem-solving style
• Shift to a win-lose style when
- Mutual gains situation isn’t apparent
- Other part won’t reciprocate info sharing
11-19
Bargaining Zone Model
Your Positions (buyer)
Initial Target Resistance
11-20
Situational Influences on Negotiation
Location
Physical setting
Time passage and
deadlines
Audience
Courtesy of Microsoft
11-21
Effective Negotiation Behavior
Courtesy of Microsoft
11-22
Types of Third Party Intervention
High
Mediation Inquisition
Arbitration
Process = low
Outcome = high
Low
11-23
Choosing the Best 3rd Party Strategy
Managers prefer inquisitional strategy, but not
usually best approach
Mediation potentially offers highest
satisfaction with process and outcomes
Use arbitration when mediation fails
11-24