CHAPTER 12 - CONFLICT AND NEGOTIATION
CHAPTER
OBJECTIVES
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1.
Define conflict.
2.
Differentiate between the traditional, human
relations, and interactionist views of conflict.
3.
Contrast functional and dysfunctional conflict.
4.
Outline the conflict process.
5.
Describe the five conflict-handling orientations.
6.
Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
7.
Identify decision biases that hinder effective
negotiation.
8.
Explain ways for individuals to improve their
negotiating skills.
LECTURE
OUTLINE
I.
A DEFINITION OF CONFLICT
A.
Definition (ppt 4)
1.
Multiple definitions of conflict.
2.
Several common themes underlie most definitions.
a)
For there to be a conflict it must be perceived
by the parties involved.
b)
Additional commonalties among most definitions of
conflict are the concepts of opposition, scarcity, and blockage and the assumption
there are two or more parties whose interests or goals appear to be incompatible.
c)
Resources—money, jobs, prestige, and power, for
example—are not unlimited, and their scarcity encourages blocking behavior.
3.
Differences between definitions tend to center
around intent and whether conflict is limited only to overt acts.
a)
The intent issue is a debate over whether blockage
behavior must be a determined action or whether it could occur as a result of
fortuitous circumstances. As to whether conflict can refer only to overt acts,
some definitions, for example, require signs of manifest fighting or open
struggle as criteria for the existence of conflict.
4.
Our definition of conflict acknowledges awareness
(perception), opposition, scarcity, and blockage.
5.
Further, we assume it to be a determined action,
which can exist at either the latent or overt level.
6.
We define conflict as a process in which an
effort is purposely made by A to offset the efforts of B by some form of
blocking that will result in frustrating B in attaining his or her goals or
furthering his or her interests.
II.
TRANSITIONS IN CONFLICT THOUGHT (ppt 5)
A.
The Traditional View (ppt 6)
1.
It was assumed that conflict was bad—something to
be avoided.
2.
The traditional view was consistent with the
attitudes that prevailed about group behavior in the 1930s and 1940s.
3.
According to studies such as those done at
Hawthorne, conflict was a dysfunctional 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.
4.
The view that all conflict is bad is a simple
approach and most of us still evaluate conflict situations on the basis of this
outmoded standard.
B.
The Human Relations View (ppt 7)
1.
Conflict was a natural occurrence in all groups
and organizations.
2.
Conflict should be accepted as it is inevitable.
3.
This view dominated conflict theory from the late
1940s through the mid-1970s.
C.
The lnteractionist View (ppt 8)
1.
This is the current perspective on conflict.
2.
The interactionist approach encourages conflict
on the grounds that a harmonious, peaceful, tranquil, and cooperative group is
likely to become static, apathetic, and nonresponsive to needs for change and
innovation.
3.
The major contribution of the interactionist
approach, therefore, is encouraging group leaders to maintain an ongoing
minimal level of conflict—enough to keep the group alive, self-critical, and
creative.
4.
The text takes an interactionist view.
a)
Whether a conflict is good or bad depends on the
type of conflict.
b)
It’s necessary to differentiate between
functional and dysfunctional conflicts.
III. FUNCTIONAL
VERSUS DYSFUNCTIONAL CONFLICT
A.
Introduction (ppt 9)
1.
The interactionist view does not propose that all
conflicts are good.
a)
Some conflicts support the goals of the group and
improve its performance; these are functional, constructive forms of conflict.
b)
There are also conflicts that hinder group
performance; these are dysfunctional, or destructive forms.
2.
The evidence indicates that you need to look at
the type of conflict to differentiate between functional and dysfunctional
conflict.
3.
There are three types of conflict: task, relationship, and process. (ppt 10-11)
a)
Task conflict relates to the content and goals of
the work
b)
Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal
relationships.
(1)
Studies demonstrate that relationship conflicts
are almost always dysfunctional.
(2)
Friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent
in relationship conflicts increase personality clashes and decrease mutual
understanding.
c)
Process conflict relates to how the work gets
done.
d)
Low levels of process and low-to-moderate levels
of task conflict are functional.
IV.
THE CONFLICT PROCESS (ppt 12)
A.
See Exhibit 12-1, the Conflict Process (ppt 13)
B.
Stage I: Potential Opposition (ppt 14)
1.
The first step in the conflict process is the
presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise.
2.
Three general categories are communication,
structure, and personal variables.
3.
Communication
a)
The communicative source represents those
opposing forces that arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and
“noise” in the communication channels.
b)
One major misconception is that poor
communication is the reason for conflicts.
c)
Poor communication is certainly not the source of
all conflicts, though there is considerable evidence to suggest that problems
in the communication process retard collaboration and stimulate misunderstanding.
d)
A review of the research suggests that semantic
difficulties, insufficient exchange of information, and noise in the
communication channel are all barriers to communication and potential
antecedent conditions to conflict.
(1)
Semantic difficulties arise as a result of
differences in training, selective perception, and inadequate information about
others.
e)
The potential for conflict increases when either
too little or too much communication takes place.
(1)
It is possible to overcommunicate, resulting in
an increase in the potential for conflict.
(2)
The channel chosen for communicating can have an
influence on stimulating opposition. The filtering process that occurs as
information is passed between members and the divergence of communications from
formal or previously established channels offer potential opportunities for
conflict to arise.
4.
Structure
a)
The term structure
is used, in this context, to include variables such as size; degree of
routinization, specialization, and standardization in the tasks assigned to
group members; heterogeneity of the group; leadership styles; reward systems;
and the degree of dependence between groups.
b)
Size and specialization act as forces to
stimulate conflict.
c)
There is some indication that a close style of
leadership, that is, tight and continuous observation with restrictive control
of the others’ behaviors, increases conflict potential, but the evidence is
not strong.
d)
Too much reliance on participation may also
stimulate conflict.
(1)
Participation and conflict are highly correlated,
apparently because participation encourages the promotion of differences.
(2)
Reward systems, too, are found to create conflict
when one member’s gain is at another’s expense.
(3)
If a group is dependent on another group, or if
interdependence allows one group to win at another’s expense, opposing forces
are stimulated.
5.
Personal Variables
a)
The most important personal variables are
individual value systems and individual idiosyncrasies and differences.
(1)
The evidence indicates that certain personality
types—for example, individuals who are highly authoritarian, dogmatic, and who
demonstrate low self-esteem—lead to potential conflict.
b)
Most important, and probably the most overlooked
variable in the study of social conflict, is the notion of differing value
systems.
(1)
That is, people differ in the importance they
give to values such as freedom, pleasure, hard work, self-respect, honesty,
obedience, and equality.
(2)
Differences in value systems are important
sources of the potential for conflict.
C.
Stage II: Cognition and Personalization (ppt 16)
1.
If the conditions cited in stage I generate
frustration, then the potential for opposition becomes realized in the second
stage.
2.
One or more of the parties must be aware of the
existence of the antecedent conditions.
3.
Because a conflict is perceived does not mean it
is personalized.
a)
It is at the personal level where conflict is
felt, when individuals become emotionally involved, that parties experience
anxiety, tension, frustration, or hostility.
D.
Stage III: Behavior (ppt 16)
1.
A member engages in action that frustrates the
attainment of another’s goals or prevents the furthering of the other’s
interests.
a)
At this juncture, the conflict is out in the
open.
2.
Overt conflict covers a full range of
behaviors—-from subtle, indirect, and highly controlled forms of interference
to direct, aggressive, violent, and uncontrolled struggle.
3.
This is also when most conflict-handling
behaviors are initiated.
4.
Five conflict-handling approaches: competition,
collaboration, avoidance, accommodation, and compromise.
a)
Competition. When one party seeks to achieve
certain goals or to further personal interests, regardless of the impact on
the parties to the conflict, he or she competes and dominates.
b)
Collaboration.
When each of the parties in conflict desires to satisfy fully the
concern of all parties, we have cooperation and the search for a mutually
beneficial outcome.
(1)
In collaboration the behavior of the parties is
aimed at solving the problem and at clarifying the differences rather than
accommodating various points of view.
c)
Avoidance. A party may recognize that a conflict
exists but react by withdrawing from it or suppressing the conflict.
(1)
Indifference or the desire to evade overt demonstration
of a disagreement can result in withdrawal.
d)
Accommodation. When the parties seek to appease
their opponents, they may be willing to place their opponents’ interests above
their own.
(1)
In order to maintain the relationship, one party
is willing to be self-sacrificing.
e)
Compromise. When each party to the conflict must
give up something, sharing occurs, resulting in a compromised outcome. In
compromising there is no clear winner or loser.
(1)
The distinguishing characteristic of compromise,
therefore, is the requirement that each party give up something.
5.
The Impact of National Culture on Conflict
Behavior. (ppt 17)
a)
Your approach to handling conflict will, to some
degree, be influenced by your cultural roots.
(1)
Americans, for example, have a reputation for
being open, direct, and competitive. These characteristics are consistent with
a society marked by relatively low uncertainty avoidance and high
quantity-of-life rankings.
(2)
People in countries low in uncertainty avoidance
feel secure and relatively free from threats of uncertainty. Their organizations,
therefore, tend to be rather open and flexible.
(3)
Countries high in quality of life emphasize
assertiveness. The cultural climate of low uncertainty avoidance and high
quantity of life tend to shape a society that is open, direct, and competitive.
b)
This premise suggests that uncertainty avoidance
and quantity/quality of life rankings would be fairly good predictors of which
conflict styles are preferred in different countries.
E.
Stage IV: Outcomes (ppt 18)
1.
Functional Outcomes
a)
Low or moderate levels of conflict could improve
the effectiveness of a group.
b)
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 improvement.
(1)
Conflict can enhance the quality of decision
making by allowing all points particularly the ones that are unusual or held by
a minority, to be weighed in important decisions.
(2)
Conflict is an antidote for groupthink.
c)
A company that has suffered because it had too
little functional conflict is General Motors.
d)
A more recent example is Yahoo!
e)
A comparison of six major decisions during the administrations
of four U.S. presidents found that conflict reduced the chance that groupthink
would overpower policy decisions.
f)
There is further evidence that conflict leads to
better and more innovative decisions, as well as increased group productivity.
g)
This means that increasing cultural diversity
should provide benefits to the organization.
2.
Dysfunctional Conflict
a)
Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which
acts to dissolve common ties and eventually leads to destruction of the group.
b)
There is a substantial body of literature to
document how the dysfunctional varieties of conflict can reduce group
effectiveness.
c)
Among the more undesirable consequences are a
retarding of communication, reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination
of group goals to the primacy of infighting among members.
d)
Research on conflict has yet to identify those
situations in which conflict is more likely to be constructive than
destructive.
3.
Creating functional conflict (ppt 19)
a)
Actually creating functional conflict is a tough
job.
b)
Organizations need to reward dissent and punish
“conflict avoiders.”
V.
NEGOTIATION
A.
Definition (ppt 20)
1.
For our purposes, we define negotiation as a
process in which two or more parties exchange goods or services and attempt to
agree on the exchange rate for them.
2.
In addition, we use the terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
B.
Bargaining Strategies
1.
There are two general approaches to negotiation:
distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining. See Exhibit 12-2. (ppt 21)
2.
Distributive Bargaining (ppt 22)
a)
Car purchase example.
b)
The negotiating process in the example is called
distributive bargaining.
c)
Its most identifying feature is that it operates
under zero-sum conditions.
(1)
In the used car example, every dollar you can get
the seller to cut from the car’s price is a dollar you save.
d)
The essence of distributive bargaining is
negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie.
e)
Probably the most widely cited example of
distributive bargaining is in labor-management negotiations over wages.
f)
Exhibit 12-3 depicts the distributive bargaining
strategy.
g)
When engaged in distributive bargaining, one’s
tactics focus on trying to get one’s opponent to agree to one’s specific target
point or to get as close to it as possible.
3.
Integrative Bargaining (ppt 23)
a)
Sales representative for a women’s sportswear
manufacturer example.
b)
This sales-credit negotiation is an example of
integrative bargaining.
(1)
In contrast to distributive bargaining,
integrative problem solving operates under the assumption that one or more settlements
exist that can create a win-win solution.
c)
All things being equal, integrative bargaining is
preferable to distributive bargaining. Because the former builds long-term
relationships and facilitates working together in the future.
4.
We don’t see more integrative bargaining in
organizations because of the conditions necessary for this type of negotiation.
a)
Parties that are open with information and candid
about their concerns.
b)
Sensitivity by both parties to the other’s needs.
c)
The ability to trust one another.
d)
A willingness by both parties to maintain
flexibility.
C.
Issues in Negotiation (ppt 24)
1.
Decision-Making Biases that Hinder Effective
Negotiation. (ppt 25)
a)
Irrational escalation of commitment. People tend
to continue a previously selected course of action beyond what rational
analysis would recommend.
b)
The mythical fixed pie. Bargainers assume that
their gain must come at the expense of the other party.
c)
Anchoring and adjustments. People often have a
tendency to anchor their judgments on irrelevant information, such as an
initial offer. Many factors influence the initial positions people take when
entering a negotiation.
d)
Framing negotiations. People tend to be overly
affected by the way information is presented to them.
e)
Availability of information. Negotiators often
rely too much on readily available information while ignoring more relevant
data.
f)
The winner’s curse. The regret one feels after
closing a negotiation. Because your opponent accepted your offer, you become
concerned that you offered too much. This postnegotiation reaction is not
unusual.
g)
Overconfidence. Many of the previous biases can
combine to inflate a person’s confidence in his or her judgment and choices.
When people hold certain beliefs and
expectations, they tend to ignore information that contradicts them.
expectations, they tend to ignore information that contradicts them.
2.
The Role of Personality Traits in Negotiation
(ppt 26)
a)
You try but can’t predict an opponent’s negotiating
tactics even if you know something about his or her personality.
b)
Personality traits have no significant direct
effect on either the bargaining process or negotiation outcomes.
(1)
You should concentrate on the issues and the
situational factors in each bargaining episode and not on your opponent and his
or her characteristics.
3.
Gender Differences in Negotiations (ppt 27)
a)
Evidence does not support the commonly held
notion that women are more cooperative and pleasant in negotiations than men.
b)
Men and women’s attitudes toward negotiation are
quite different.
c)
Women may penalize themselves by failing to
engage in negotiations when they should.
4.
Cultural Differences in Negotiations (ppt 28)
a)
Negotiating styles clearly vary among national
cultures.
b)
The French like conflict. They frequently gain
recognition and develop their reputations by thinking and acting against
others. As a result, the French tend to take a long time in negotiating
agreements, and they aren’t overly concerned about whether their opponents like
or dislike them.
c)
The Chinese also draw out negotiations but for a
different reason. They believe that negotiations never end. Like the Japanese,
the Chinese negotiate to develop a relationship and a commitment to work
together rather than to tie up every loose end.
d)
Americans are known around the world for their
impatience and their desire to be liked. Astute negotiators from other countries
often turn these characteristics to their advantage by dragging out
negotiations and making friendship conditional on the final settlement.
e)
The cultural context of the negotiation
significantly influences the amount and type of preparation for bargaining the
relative emphasis on task versus interpersonal relationships; the tactics
used, and even where the negotiation should be conducted.
f)
The first study compared North Americans, Arabs,
and Russians.
(1)
North Americans tried to persuade by relying on
facts and appealing to logic. They countered opponents’ arguments with
objective facts. They made small concessions early in the negotiation to
establish a relationship and usually reciprocated opponents’ concessions.
(2)
North Americans treated deadlines as very
important.
(3)
Arabs tried to persuade by appealing to emotion.
They countered opponents’ arguments with subjective feelings. They made concessions
throughout the bargaining process and almost always reciprocated opponents’
concessions. Arabs approached deadlines very casually.
(4)
Russians based their arguments on asserted
ideals. They made few, if any, concessions. Any concession offered by an
opponent was viewed as a weakness and was almost never reciprocated. Finally,
Russians tended to ignore deadlines.
g)
The second study looked at verbal and nonverbal
negotiation tactics exhibited by North Americans, Japanese, and Brazilians
during half-hour bargaining sessions.
(1)
Brazilians on average said “No” eighty-three
times compared with five times for the Japanese and nine times for the North
Americans.
(2)
The Japanese displayed more than five periods of
silence lasting longer than ten seconds during each thirty-minute session.
(3)
North Americans averaged three and a half such
periods; the Brazilians had none.
(4)
The Japanese and North Americans interrupted
their opponent about the same number of times, but the Brazilians interrupted
two-and-a-half to three times more often than the North Americans and the
Japanese.
(5)
While the Japanese and the North Americans had no
physical contact with their opponents during negotiations except for
hand-shaking, the Brazilians touched each other almost five times every half
hour.
5.
The Ethics of Lying and Deceiving in Negotiations
a)
The common perception is that one must deceive to
succeed.
b)
Debate continues about whether “little lies” or
omissions are ethical in a negotiating context.
VI.
IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS
A.
Managing Conflict (ppt 29)
1.
Many people assume that conflict is related to
lower group and organizational performance. That assumption is often false.
Conflict can be either constructive or destructive to the functioning of a
group or unit. When it’s too high or too low, it hinders performance. An
optimal level is one in which there is enough conflict to prevent stagnation,
stimulate creativity, allow tensions to be released, and sow the seeds for
change, yet not so much as to be disruptive.
2.
Advice to managers faced with excessive conflict:
don’t assume that there’s one conflict-handling approach that will always be
best! Select the resolution technique appropriate for each situation.
Guidelines for this include:
a)
Use competition when quick, decisive action is
vital (in emergencies); on important issues, where unpopular actions need
implementing (in cost cutting, enforcing unpopular rules, discipline); on
issues vital to the organization’s welfare when you know you’re right; and
against people who take advantage of noncompetitive behavior.
b)
Use collaboration to find an integrative solution
when both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised; when your
objective is to learn; to merge insights from people with different
perspectives; to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus;
and to work through feelings that have interfered with a relationship.
c)
Use avoidance when an issue is trivial or when
more important issues are pressing; when you perceive no chance of satisfying
your concerns; when potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution;
to let people cool down and regain perspective; when gathering information
supercedes immediate decision; when others can resolve the conflict more
effectively; and when issues seem tangential or symptomatic of other issues.
d)
Use accommodation when you find you are wrong and
to allow a better position to be heard, to learn, and to show your
reasonableness; when issues are more important to others than to yourself and
to satisfy others and maintain cooperation; to build social credits for later
issues; to minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing; when harmony and
stability are especially important; and to allow subordinates to develop by
learning from mistakes.
e)
Use compromise when goals are important but not
worth the effort of potential disruption of more assertive approaches; when
opponents with equal power are committed to mutually exclusive goals; to
achieve temporary settlements to complex issues; to arrive at expedient
solutions under time pressure; and as a backup when collaboration or
competition is unsuccessful.
B.
Toward Improving Negotiation Skills (ppt 30)
1.
Recommendations for improving your effectiveness
at negotiating.
a)
Research Your Opponent. Acquire as much
information as you can about your opponent’s interests and goals. What
constituencies must he or she appease? What is his or her strategy?
b)
Begin with a Positive Overture. Research shows
that concessions tend to be reciprocated and lead to agreements. As a result,
begin bargaining with a positive overture—perhaps a small concession—and then
reciprocate your opponent’s concessions.
c)
Address the Problem, Not Personalities.
Concentrate on the negotiation issues not on the personal characteristics of
your opponent. It’s your opponent’s ideas or position that you disagree with,
not him or her personally. Separate the people from the problem, and don’t
personalize differences.
d)
Pay Little Attention to Initial Offers. Treat
initial offers as merely a point of departure. Everyone has to have an initial
position. They tend to be extreme and idealistic. Treat them as such.
e)
Emphasize Win-Win Solutions. If conditions are
supportive, look for an integrative solution. Frame options in terms of your
opponent’s interests and look for solutions that can allow both you and your
opponent to declare a victory.
f)
Create an Open and Trusting Climate. Skilled
negotiators are good listeners, ask questions, focus their arguments directly,
are not defensive, and have learned to avoid words and phrases that can
irritate an opponent.
SUMMARY
(ppt 31-32)
1.
Conflict is a process in which an effort is
purposely made by A to object the efforts of B by some form of blocking that
will result in frustrating B in attaining his or her goals or furthering his or
her interests. This definition of conflict acknowledges awareness (perception),
opposition, scarcity, and blockage.
2.
The thinking about conflict has gone through a
number of changes. The traditional view assumed that conflict was bad,
something to be avoided. The human relations view sees conflict as a natural
occurrence in all groups and organizations. The current perspective on conflict
is the interactionist view. It encourages conflict on the grounds that a
harmonious, peaceful, tranquil, and cooperative group is likely to become
static, apathetic, and nonresponsive to needs for change and innovation.
3.
The interactionist view does not propose that all
conflicts are good. 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. The demarcation between functional and dysfunctional is neither clear
nor precise.
4.
There is a conflict process model; the text
outlines it in Exhibit 12-1. The first step in the conflict process is the
presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise. Three
general categories: communication, structure, and personal variables. If the
conditions cited in stage I generate frustration, then the potential for opposition
becomes realized in the second stage. A member engages in action that
frustrates the attainment of another’s goals or prevents the furthering of the
other’s interests, this is Stage III and at this juncture, the conflict is out
in the open. The fourth and final step focuses on functional outcomes of the conflict.
5.
There are two general approaches to negotiation:
distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining. The essence of
distributive bargaining is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie.
In contrast to distributive bargaining, integrative problem solving operates
under the assumption that one or more settlements exist that can create a
win-win solution.
6.
We become ineffective in negotiation through
irrational escalation of commitment, the mythical fixed pie, anchoring and
adjustments, framing negotiations, availability of information, the winner’s
curse, and overconfidence. Both personality traits and cultural differences
also play a role in negotiation.
7.
We can improve our negotiation skills through a
number of tactical steps, such as research your opponent; begin with a positive
overture; addressing the problem, not personalities; paying little attention to
initial offers; emphasizing win-win solutions; and creating an open and
trusting climate.
DISCUSSION
QUESTIONS
1.
How does the definition of conflict used by the
author of your text differ from other traditional definitions of conflict?
Answer - There are multiple definitions of conflict. Several
common themes underlie most definitions: conflict must be perceived by the
parties to it, there must be opposition, scarcity, and blockage and the assumption
that there are two or more parties whose interests or goals appear to be incompatible,
and resources must be involved. Your author’s definition of conflict
acknowledges awareness (perception), opposition, scarcity, and blockage.
Further, they assume it to be a determined action, which can exist at either
the latent or overt level. They define conflict as a process in which an effort
is purposely made by A to object the efforts of B by some form of blocking that
will result in frustrating B in attaining his or her goals or furthering his or
her interests. The text takes an interactionist view. Whether a conflict is
good or bad depends on the type of conflict. It’s necessary to differentiate
between functional and dysfunctional conflicts.
2.
How has management thinking about conflict
changed over the years?
Answer - It was assumed that conflict was bad—something to
be avoided. The traditional view was consistent with the attitudes that prevailed
about group behavior in the 1930s and 1940s.
According to studies such as those done by Hawthorne, conflict was a
dysfunctional 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. Then came the human relations view that
conflict was a natural occurrence in all groups and organizations. This view
dominated conflict theory from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s. The current
perspective is the interactionist view, which encourages conflict on the
grounds that a harmonious, peaceful, tranquil, and cooperative group is likely
to become static, apathetic, and nonresponsive to needs for change and
innovation. The major contribution of the interactionist approach, therefore,
is encouraging group leaders to maintain an ongoing minimal level of
conflict—enough to keep the group alive, self-critical, and creative.
3.
How does functional conflict differ from
dysfunctional conflict?
Answer - 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. The demarcation between functional and
dysfunctional is neither clear nor precise. The important criterion is group
performance. Since groups exist to attain a goal or goals, it is the impact of
the conflict on the group, rather than on any single individual, that defines
functionality. 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 improvement. Conflict is an antidote for groupthink. Uncontrolled
opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties and eventually
leads to the destruction of the group. There is a substantial body of
literature to document how the dysfunctional varieties of conflict can reduce
group effectiveness.
4.
The evidence indicates that you need to look at
the type of conflict to differentiate functional from dysfunctional
conflict. Identify and describe the
three types of conflict.
Answer – Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the
work. Relationship conflict focuses on
interpersonal relationships. Process
conflict relates to how the work gets done.
Studies demonstrate that relationship conflicts are almost always
dysfunctional. Low levels of process
conflict and low-to-moderate levels of task conflict are functional.
5.
Describe the conflict process.
Answer - This process is outlined in Exhibit 12-1. The first
step in the conflict process is the presence of conditions that create opportunities
for conflict to arise. If the conditions cited in Stage I generate frustration,
then the potential for opposition becomes realized in the second stage. One or
more of the parties must be aware of the existence of the antecedent conditions.
A member engages in action that frustrates the attainment of another’s goals or
prevents the furthering of the other’s interests. At this juncture, the
conflict is out in the open. The fourth and final stage relates to functional
outcomes. Low or moderate levels of conflict could improve the effectiveness of
a group.
6.
What conflict-handling behavior would be best in
each of the following situations?
a.
A manager of marketing is in a conflict with
another manager in his cross-functional project team. He’d like to resolve the
conflict in a way so that he’s on good working terms with his peer.
b.
Tom negotiates to win. He doesn’t feel like he’s
really negotiated until he’s left “some blood on the floor.”
c.
Henry is in a disagreement with his boss’ boss,
the executive vice president. Henry doesn’t really care about the matter and
the executive vice president can make things difficult for Henry in his job in
the future.
d.
Jane wants to go to Palm Beach for spring break,
her parents are saying no. Her dad’s pretty worried that she would even ask
because “of all the things college kids do down there.” Jane wants to make
peace because she really wants to go to Europe with a study group this summer.
e.
Althea and Maya both want a secretary for their
departments, but HR will only allocate one new personnel slot to their general
area. Neither can really employ a full-time secretary but the company has spent
its temporary help budget.
Answer -
a.
Collaboration.
When each of the parties in conflict desires to fully satisfy the
concern of all parties, we have cooperation and the search for a mutually
beneficial outcome.
b.
Competition. When one party seeks to achieve
certain goals or to further personal interests, regardless of the impact on
the parties to the conflict, he or she competes and dominates.
c.
Avoidance. A party may recognize that a conflict
exists but react by withdrawing from it or suppressing the conflict.
Indifference or the desire to evade overt demonstration of a disagreement can
result in withdrawal.
d.
Accommodation. When the parties seek to appease
their opponents, they may be willing to place their opponents’ interests above
their own. In order to maintain the relationship, one party is willing to be
self-sacrificing.
e.
Compromise. When each party to the conflict must
give up something, sharing occurs, resulting in a compromised outcome. In
compromising there is no clear winner or loser.
7.
As a manager, how can you go about creating
functional conflict in your organization?
Answer- This
is difficult to do, but the organization needs a climate in which dissent is
actually rewarded, and conflict avoiders are punished. The challenge is when managers hear news that
they don’t want to hear. This fosters
communication and gets the conflict out in the open, which benefits the entire
organization.
8.
As a manager in another country, what things do
you need to consider when handling conflict?
Answer - Be aware that your approach to handling conflict
will, to some degree, be influenced by your cultural roots. Americans, for
example, have a reputation for being open, direct, and competitive. These
characteristics are consistent with a society marked by relatively low uncertainty
avoidance and high quantity-of-life rankings. People in countries low in
uncertainty avoidance feel secure and relatively free from threats of
uncertainty. Their organizations, therefore, tend to be rather open and
flexible. Countries high in quality of life emphasize assertiveness. The
cultural climate of low uncertainty avoidance and high quantity of life tends
to shape a society that is open, direct, and competitive. This premise suggests
that uncertainty avoidance and quantity/quality of life rankings would be
fairly good predictors of which conflict styles are preferred in different
countries.
9.
Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
Answer - There are two general approaches to negotiation:
distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining. The most identifying
feature of distributive bargaining is that it operates under zero-sum
conditions. The essence of distributive bargaining is negotiating over who gets
what share of a fixed pie. When engaged in distributive bargaining, one’s
tactics focus on trying to get one’s opponent to agree to one’s specific target
point or to get as close to it as possible. In contrast to distributive
bargaining, integrative problem solving operates under the assumption that one
or more settlements exist that can create a win-win solution. All things being
equal, integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining,
because the former builds long-term relationships and facilitates working
together in the future. We don’t see more integrative bargaining in
organizations because of the conditions necessary for this type of negotiation:
parties who are open with information and candid about their concerns, a
sensitivity by both parties to the other’s needs, the ability to trust one another,
and a willingness by both parties to maintain flexibility.
10.
When entering into a bargaining situation,
particularly using the distributive bargaining strategy, what is the importance
of a “target point,” a “resistance point,” and a “settlement range”?
Answer – Each party has a target point that defines what
he or she would like to achieve. Also
each party has a resistance point, which marks the lowest outcome that is
acceptable—the point below which they would break off negotiations rather than
accept a less-favorable settlement. The
area between their resistance points is the settlement range. As long as there is some overlap in their
aspiration ranges, there exists a settlement area where each one’s aspirations
can be met.
11.
What are the decision biases that can hinder
effective negotiation?
Answer -
§ Irrational
escalation of commitment. People tend to continue a previously selected course
of action beyond what rational analysis would recommend.
§ The
mythical fixed pie. Bargainers assume that their gain must come at the expense
of the other party.
§ Anchoring
and adjustments. People often have a tendency to anchor their judgments on
irrelevant information, such as an initial offer. Many factors influence the
initial positions people take when entering a negotiation.
§ Framing
negotiations. People tend to be overly affected by the way information is
presented to them.
§ Availability
of information. Negotiators often rely too much on readily available information
while ignoring more relevant data.
§ The
winner’s curse. The regret one feels after closing a negotiation. Because your
opponent accepted your offer, you become concerned that you offered too much.
This postnegotiation reaction is not unusual.
§ Overconfidence.
Many of the previous biases can combine to inflate a person’s confidence in his
or her judgment and choices. When people hold certain beliefs and expectations,
they tend to ignore information that contradicts them.
12.
How do culture differences affect negotiation
styles? Offer examples of those differences in specific countries.
Answer - Negotiating styles clearly vary among national
cultures. The French like conflict. They frequently gain recognition and
develop their reputations by thinking and acting against others. As a result,
the French tend to take a long time in negotiating agreements, and they aren’t
overly concerned about whether their opponents like or dislike them. The
Chinese also draw out negotiations but for a different reason. They believe
that negotiations never end. Like the Japanese, the Chinese negotiate to
develop a relationship and a commitment to work together rather than to tie up
every loose end. Americans are known around the world for their impatience and
their desire to be liked. Astute negotiators from other countries often turn
these characteristics to their advantage by dragging out negotiations and making
friendship conditional on the final settlement. North Americans tried to
persuade by relying on facts and appealing to logic. They countered opponents’
arguments with objective facts. They made small concessions early in the
negotiation to establish a relationship and usually reciprocated opponents’
concessions. North Americans treated deadlines as very important. Arabs tried
to persuade by appealing to emotion. They countered opponents’ arguments with
subjective feelings. They made concessions throughout the bargaining process
and almost always reciprocated opponents’ concessions. Arabs approached
deadlines very casually. Russians based their arguments on asserted ideals.
They made few, if any, concessions. Any concession offered by an opponent was
viewed as a weakness and was almost never reciprocated. Finally, the Russians
tended to ignore deadlines.
13.
You are preparing to negotiate for your first car
purchase. What techniques could you use to improve the outcome of this
negotiation?
Answer - Students’ answers will vary. Some tactics,
researching your opponent will clearly fit any situation. Other tactics such as
address the problem not personality, may be somewhat irrelevant. Student
justification is important.
§ Research
Your Opponent. Acquire as much information as you can about your opponent’s
interests and goals.
§ Begin
with a Positive Overture. Research shows that concessions tend to be reciprocated
and lead to agreements.
§ Address
the Problem, Not Personalities. Concentrate on the negotiation issues not on
the personal characteristics of your opponent.
§ Pay
Little Attention to Initial Offers. Treat initial offers as merely a point of
departure. Everyone has to have an initial position. They tend to be extreme
and idealistic.
§ Emphasize
Win-Win Solutions. If conditions are supportive, look for an integrative solution.
Frame options in terms of your opponent’s interests and look for solutions that
can allow both you and your opponent to declare a victory.
§ Create
an Open and Trusting Climate. Skilled negotiators are good listeners, ask questions,
focus their arguments directly, are not defensive, and have learned to avoid
words and phrases that can irritate an opponent.
14. Is it
ethical to lie during a negotiation?
Answer- There are many
different perspectives on what constitutes a lie during a negotiation session,
and when this is unethical. Use this as
a class discussion item.
EXERCISES
A. Conflict-Management
Style Survey*
Instructions: Answer the following
questions from a single frame of reference—work-related conflicts, family
conflicts, or social conflicts. Allocate ten points among the four alternative
answers given for each of the fifteen items below.
Example: When the people I supervise become involved in
a personal conflict, I usually:
Intervene
to Call a meeting Offer to help Ignore the
settle the dispute. to talk over if I can. problem.
the problem.
settle the dispute. to talk over if I can. problem.
the problem.
3 6
1 0 = 10
Be certain that your answers
add up to 10.
1.
When someone I care about is actively
hostile toward me—yelling, threatening, abusive—I tend to:
Respond in a Try to persuade the Stay
and listen Walk away.
hostile manner. person to give up the as long as possible.
hostile
behavior.
_____ _____ _____ _____
2.
When someone who is unimportant to me is
actively hostile toward me, i.e., yelling, threatening, abusive, and so on, I
tend to:
Respond in a Try to persuade the Stay
and listen Walk away.
hostile manner. person to give up the as long as possible.
hostile
behavior.
_____ _____ _____ _____
3.
When I observe people in conflicts in which
anger, threats, hostility, and strong opinions are present, I tend to:
Become involved Attempt to Observe to see Leave as quickly
and take a mediate. what happens. as possible.
position.
and take a mediate. what happens. as possible.
position.
_____ _____ _____ _____
4.
When I perceive another person as meeting his or
her needs at my expense, I am apt to:
Work to do Rely on persuasion Work
hard at Accept the
anything I can and “facts” when changing how I situation
to change that attempting to have relate to that as it is.
person. that person change. person.
anything I can and “facts” when changing how I situation
to change that attempting to have relate to that as it is.
person. that person change. person.
_____ _____ _____ _____
5.
When involved in an interpersonal dispute, I
generally:
Draw the other Examine the Look hard for Let time take its
person into issues between a
workable course and let
the
seeing
the us as logically compromise. problem
problem as I do. as possible. work itself out.
problem as I do. as possible. work itself out.
_____ _____ _____ _____
6.
The quality that I value the most in dealing with
conflict would be:
Emotional Intelligence. Love
and Patience.
strength and openness.
security.
strength and openness.
security.
_____ _____ _____ _____
7.
Following a serious altercation with someone I
care for deeply, I:
Strongly desire Want to go back and Worry about it a lot Let it lie and do
to go back and settle work it out—whatever but not initiate/plan not plan.
things my way. it takes. for further contact.
to go back and settle work it out—whatever but not initiate/plan not plan.
things my way. it takes. for further contact.
_____ _____ _____ _____
8.
When I see a serious conflict developing between
two people I care about, I tend to:
Express my Attempt
to Watch to see Leave the
disappointment persuade them what develops. scene.
that this had to to resolve their
happen. differences.
disappointment persuade them what develops. scene.
that this had to to resolve their
happen. differences.
_____ _____ _____ _____
9.
When I see a serious conflict developing between
two people who are unimportant to me, I tend to:
Express my Attempt to persuade Watch
to see Leave the
disappointment them to resolve what develops. scene.
that this happened. their differences.
_____ _____ _____ _____
10.
The feedback that I receive from most people
about how I behave when faced with conflict and opposition indicates that I:
Try hard to Try to work Am
easygoing and Usually avoid
get my way. out differences take
a soft or the conflict.
cooperatively. conciliatory position.
cooperatively. conciliatory position.
_____ _____ _____ _____
11.
When communicating with someone with whom I am
having a serious conflict, I:
Try to overpower Talk a little Am an active Am
a passive
the other person bit more than listener (feeding back listener
with my speech. I listen. words and feelings). (agreeing and
the other person bit more than listener (feeding back listener
with my speech. I listen. words and feelings). (agreeing and
apologizing).
_____ _____ _____ _____
12.
When involved in an unpleasant conflict, I:
Use humor with Make an occasional Relate humor only Suppress all
the other party. quip or joke about to myself. attempts at
the situation. humor.
the other party. quip or joke about to myself. attempts at
the situation. humor.
_____ _____ _____ _____
13.
When someone does something that irritates me
(e.g., smokes in a nonsmoking area or crowds in line in front of me), my
tendency in communicating with the offending person is to (select an answer
from each row):
Insist that Look the person Maintain Avoid
looking
the person directly in the intermittent eye directly
look me in eye and maintain contact. at the person.
the eye. eye contact.
the person directly in the intermittent eye directly
look me in eye and maintain contact. at the person.
the eye. eye contact.
_____ _____ _____ _____
Stand close Use my hands Stand
close to Stand back and
and make and body to the person without keep my hands
physical illustrate my touching him to myself.
contact. points. or her.
and make and body to the person without keep my hands
physical illustrate my touching him to myself.
contact. points. or her.
_____ _____ _____ _____
Use strong, Try to persuade Talk gently and tell Say
and do
direct language and the person to stop. the person what my nothing.
tell the person to stop. feelings
are.
_____ _____ _____ _____
CONFLICT-MANAGEMENT STYLE SURVEY SCORING AND
INTERPRETATION SHEET
Instructions: When you have completed all fifteen items,
add your scores vertically, resulting in four column totals. Put these on the
blanks below.
Totals:
_____ _____ _____ _____
Column 1 Column 2 Column
3 Column 4
Your highest score is your dominant conflict management
strategy. All of us use all four strategies at one time or another. Your
dominant style is the one you prefer and will certainly come out in more
intense conflict situations. Knowing your style will help you be more effective
in dealing with conflict.
Four conflict-handling approaches: competition,
collaboration, avoidance, and accommodation.
Column
1. Competition. When one party seeks to achieve certain goals or to further personal
interests, regardless of the impact on the parties to the conflict, he or she
competes and dominates.
Column
2. Collaboration. When each of the parties in conflict desires to satisfy fully
the concern of all parties, we have cooperation and the search for a mutually
beneficial outcome. In collaboration, the behavior of the parties is aimed at
solving the problem and at clarifying the differences rather than accommodating
various points of view.
Column
3. Accommodation. When the parties seek to appease their opponents, they may be
willing to place their opponents’ interests above their own. In order to
maintain the relationship, one party is willing to be self-sacrificing.
Column
4. Avoidance. A party may recognize that a conflict exists but react by withdrawing
from it or suppressing the conflict. Indifference or the desire to evade overt
demonstration of a disagreement can result in withdrawal.
Now total your scores for Columns 1 and 2 and Columns 3
and 4.
Column 1 + Column 2 ________ = Score A Column 3 + Column 4 ________ = Score B
If Score A is significantly higher than Score B (25
points or more), it may indicate a tendency toward assertive conflict
management. A significantly higher B score signals a more conciliatory
approach.
* Adapted from the work of Marc Robert, in the 1987
University Associates, Inc.
B. Bargaining: Good, Bad, or Ugly?
Have students work in small groups to develop a “script”
to role play the following scenarios in front of the class. You can assign a different scenario to each
group, or have two groups role play the same scenario to discuss comparisons
and contrasts in style. Require each
group to first role play the scenario from a distributive bargaining
perspective, and then from an integrative bargaining perspective. This should allow for comparison and contrast
of the two styles of bargaining, and then encourage students to discuss which
style they believed was more effective for achieving a final outcome.
Scenario:
A group of students is wanting the faculty member to postpone
the next exam until after Spring Break.
Currently the exam is scheduled for the Friday before Spring Break, and
you would prefer to have the exam on the Monday, or even Wednesday, after
Spring Break. The week before Break is
getting quite busy, and you need the time to study over Spring Break in order
to do well on the exam.
Scenario:
The company you currently work for does not have any
educational reimbursement benefit available.
You would like to have your employer offer this benefit, as you and many
of your fellow workers would like to go back to school (part-time) and earn
your MBA degree. But, the cost of
tuition is expensive, and you would like your company to help with the
expenses. Many of the other companies in
your locale and industry do offer their employees this educational
reimbursement, and you would like your company to do so, as well.
Scenario:
The university is considering adding a “computer fee” to
all students who are enrolled at your campus.
The reason for the computer fee is to be able to generate funds in order
to provide better computer instruction and facilities (labs and
classrooms). But, fees are already
relatively high. You want the computer
instruction and facilities, but you and your group want to have the facilities,
but you are reluctant to have fees increase.
Scenario:
You would like to have your company allow you to work on
a flexible schedule. You would agree to
core hours of 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., when every employee is required to be at the
workplace, but you would like to choose the other four hours you work each
day. Your job is such that it would
support this type of schedule, i.e. you do not work on an assembly line. Present a persuasive discussion to encourage
your employer to go to a “flextime schedule.”
Analyzing Your Organization
Have students create a negotiation scenario where they
may not have thought of negotiating. For
example, it is common and accepted that in the U.S. culture we will negotiate
for automobiles, but not as widely accepted when purchasing furniture, for
example. Challenge the class to
negotiate their next major purchase, and have them bring to the class the
results of their negotiation attempts. For
example, was the negotiation integrative or distributive? Did they implement any of the methods
discussed in class for improving negotiation skills? What was the outcome? Did gender or other variables affect the
outcome? Did they actually save any
money? This can also be a written report
or an in-class exercise.
No comments:
Post a Comment