CHAPTER 14: CONFLICT AND NEGOTIATIONS
Define conflict and differentiate among the traditional, interactionist, and managed-
conflict views of conflict.
Conflict is a perception. A process that begins when one party perceives another party has or is
about to negatively affect something the first party cares about.
Perspectives on conflicts:
- Traditional View of conflict assumes all conflict is bad and to be avoided. Conflict was a
disfunctional outcome 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.
- Interactionist View of conflict encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious,
peaceful, tranquil and cooperative group is prone to becoming static, apathetic, and
unresponsive to needs for change and innovation. A minimal level of conflict can help keep a
group viable, self-critical, and creative. This view does not propose that all conflicts are good,
but functional conflict supports the goals of the group and improves its performance and is,
thus, a constructive form of conflict. Disfunctional conflict is destructive, task conflict relates
to the content and goals of the work, relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal
relationships, and process conflict relates to how the work gets done.
- Resolution-Focused view of conflict focuses more on productive conflict resolution. Finding
constructive methods for resolving conflicts productively so their disruptive influence can be
minimized.
Outline the conflict process.
The conflict process has 5 stages:
1. Potential Opposition or Incompatibility the appearance of conditions that create
opportunities for conflict to arise. We group these conditions into 3 general categories:
- Communication: in this category conflict arises from semantic difficulties,
misunderstandings, and “noise” in the communication channels.
- Structure: includes variables such as size of the group, degree of specialization in the tasks
assigned to group members, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibility, leadership
styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence between groups. The larger the group
and the more specialized its activities, the greater the likelihood of conflict. Reward systems
can create conflict as well, when one member’s gain comes at another’s expense.
Personal Variables: e.g. personality, emotions and values. Personality can cause conflict,
because some people just tend to get into conflicts a lot. Emotions can also cause conflict,
because if someone has had a hectic morning before even going to work, that person takes
his/her irritation with him/her to work.
2. Cognition and Personalization if the conditions is stage 1 negatively affect something one
party cares about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized in
the second stage. However, because a conflict is a perceived conflict doesn’t mean it is
personalized. It is at the felt conflict level, when individuals become emotionally involved,
that they experience anxiety, tension, frustration, or hostility.
3. Intentions intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions and their overt behavior.
They are decisions to act in a given way. Using 2 dimensions (cooperativeness and
assertiveness) we can identify 5 conflict-handling intentions:
- Competing: unassertive and uncooperative. When one person seeks to satisfy her own
interests regardless of the impact on the other parties in the conflict.
, - Collaborating: assertive and cooperative. When parties in conflict each desire to fully satisfy
the concerns of all parties. The parties tend to solve a problem by clarifying differences rather
than by accommodating various points of view.
- Avoiding: unassertive and uncooperative. A person may recognize a conflict exists and want
to withdraw from or suppress it.
- Accommodating: unassertive and cooperative. A party who seeks to appease an opponent
may be willing to place the opponent’s interests above his own, sacrificing to maintain the
relationship. Supporting someone else’s opinion despite your reservations about it.
- Compromising: midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness. There is no clear
winner or loser. Rather, there is a willingness to ration the object of the conflict and accept a
solution that provides incomplete satisfaction of both parties’ concerns. Each party intends to
give up something.
4. Behavior includes statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties,
usually as overt attempts to implement their own intentions. This stage is a dynamic process
of interaction.
Annihilatory conflict Overt efforts to destroy the other party
Aggressive physical attacks
Threats and ultimatums
Assertive verbal attacks
Overt questioning or challenging of others
Minor disagreements or misunderstanding.
No conflict
5. Outcomes the action-reaction interplay between the conflicting parties results in
consequences. These outcomes may be functional or dysfunctional.
- Functional outcomes: conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions,
stimulates creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group
members.
- Dysfunctional outcomes: e.g. decrease of group effectiveness, poor communication,
reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to the primacy of
infighting among members.
- Managing functional conflict: (1) recognizing when there really is a disagreement. Many
apparent conflicts are due to people using different language to discuss the same general
course of action. (2) have opposing groups pick parts of the solution that are most
important to them and then focus on how each side can get its top needs satisfied.
Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
Define conflict and differentiate among the traditional, interactionist, and managed-
conflict views of conflict.
Conflict is a perception. A process that begins when one party perceives another party has or is
about to negatively affect something the first party cares about.
Perspectives on conflicts:
- Traditional View of conflict assumes all conflict is bad and to be avoided. Conflict was a
disfunctional outcome 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.
- Interactionist View of conflict encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious,
peaceful, tranquil and cooperative group is prone to becoming static, apathetic, and
unresponsive to needs for change and innovation. A minimal level of conflict can help keep a
group viable, self-critical, and creative. This view does not propose that all conflicts are good,
but functional conflict supports the goals of the group and improves its performance and is,
thus, a constructive form of conflict. Disfunctional conflict is destructive, task conflict relates
to the content and goals of the work, relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal
relationships, and process conflict relates to how the work gets done.
- Resolution-Focused view of conflict focuses more on productive conflict resolution. Finding
constructive methods for resolving conflicts productively so their disruptive influence can be
minimized.
Outline the conflict process.
The conflict process has 5 stages:
1. Potential Opposition or Incompatibility the appearance of conditions that create
opportunities for conflict to arise. We group these conditions into 3 general categories:
- Communication: in this category conflict arises from semantic difficulties,
misunderstandings, and “noise” in the communication channels.
- Structure: includes variables such as size of the group, degree of specialization in the tasks
assigned to group members, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibility, leadership
styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence between groups. The larger the group
and the more specialized its activities, the greater the likelihood of conflict. Reward systems
can create conflict as well, when one member’s gain comes at another’s expense.
Personal Variables: e.g. personality, emotions and values. Personality can cause conflict,
because some people just tend to get into conflicts a lot. Emotions can also cause conflict,
because if someone has had a hectic morning before even going to work, that person takes
his/her irritation with him/her to work.
2. Cognition and Personalization if the conditions is stage 1 negatively affect something one
party cares about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized in
the second stage. However, because a conflict is a perceived conflict doesn’t mean it is
personalized. It is at the felt conflict level, when individuals become emotionally involved,
that they experience anxiety, tension, frustration, or hostility.
3. Intentions intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions and their overt behavior.
They are decisions to act in a given way. Using 2 dimensions (cooperativeness and
assertiveness) we can identify 5 conflict-handling intentions:
- Competing: unassertive and uncooperative. When one person seeks to satisfy her own
interests regardless of the impact on the other parties in the conflict.
, - Collaborating: assertive and cooperative. When parties in conflict each desire to fully satisfy
the concerns of all parties. The parties tend to solve a problem by clarifying differences rather
than by accommodating various points of view.
- Avoiding: unassertive and uncooperative. A person may recognize a conflict exists and want
to withdraw from or suppress it.
- Accommodating: unassertive and cooperative. A party who seeks to appease an opponent
may be willing to place the opponent’s interests above his own, sacrificing to maintain the
relationship. Supporting someone else’s opinion despite your reservations about it.
- Compromising: midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness. There is no clear
winner or loser. Rather, there is a willingness to ration the object of the conflict and accept a
solution that provides incomplete satisfaction of both parties’ concerns. Each party intends to
give up something.
4. Behavior includes statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties,
usually as overt attempts to implement their own intentions. This stage is a dynamic process
of interaction.
Annihilatory conflict Overt efforts to destroy the other party
Aggressive physical attacks
Threats and ultimatums
Assertive verbal attacks
Overt questioning or challenging of others
Minor disagreements or misunderstanding.
No conflict
5. Outcomes the action-reaction interplay between the conflicting parties results in
consequences. These outcomes may be functional or dysfunctional.
- Functional outcomes: conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions,
stimulates creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group
members.
- Dysfunctional outcomes: e.g. decrease of group effectiveness, poor communication,
reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to the primacy of
infighting among members.
- Managing functional conflict: (1) recognizing when there really is a disagreement. Many
apparent conflicts are due to people using different language to discuss the same general
course of action. (2) have opposing groups pick parts of the solution that are most
important to them and then focus on how each side can get its top needs satisfied.
Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
