Chapter 11 â Conflict and Negotiation In The Workplace
Chapter 11 – Conflict and Negotiation In The Workplace •
Conflict is a process in which one party perceives his or her interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party o
•
It is ultimately based on perception; it exists whenever one party BELIEVES that another might obstruct its efforts, where or not they actually intend to do so
Conflict has many consequences, some of which are outlined below; o
o
Negative Consequences
Uses otherwise productive time
Less information sharing
Higher stress, dissatisfaction, and turnover
Increases organization politics
Wastes Resources
Weakens team cohesion (conflict among team members)
Positive Consequences
Better decision making (Tests logic of arguments, questions assumptions)
More responsive to changing environment
Stronger team cohesion (conflict between team and outside opponents)
•
Constructive Conflict is a type of conflict in which people focus their discussion on the issue while maintaining respect for people having other points of view. It encourages different positions on the issue while maintaining respect for other viewpoints.
•
Relationship Conflict (AKA Socioemotional conflict) focuses on the characteristics of other individuals, rather than on the issues, as the source of conflict. The parties refer to “personality clashes” and other interpersonal incompatibilities rather than legitimate differences of opinion regarding the task or decision. o
There are 3 strategies/conditions that minimize the level of relationship conflict:
Emotional Intelligence: Relationship conflict is less likely to occur or escalate when team members have high levels of emotional intelligence. They can regulate their emotions, reducing risk of escalation
Cohesive Team: The long people work together and know each other, the more they develop a mutual trust and more room to show emotions without being personally offended
Supportive Team Norms: When team norms encourage openness, members appreciate honest dialogue without personally reacting to it.
Structural Sources of Conflict in Organizations •
Incompatible Goals o
•
Differentiation o
•
Conflict tends to increase with the level of task interdependence. It refers to the extent to which employees must share materials, information, or expertise to perform their job. Aside from complete independence, employees tend to have the lowest risk of conflict when working with others in a pooled interdependence relationship. This occurs when people work individually except for reliance on a common resource or authority
Scare Resources o
•
Differentiation – differences among people and work units regarding their training, values, beliefs, and experiences. It differs from incompatible goals; two people or departments may agree on a common goal (ex: serving customers better) but have different beliefs about how to achieve that goal.
Interdependence o
•
Goal incompatibility occurs when the goals of one person or department seem to interfere with another person’s or department’s goals
Resource scarcity generates conflict because each person or unit requiring the same resource necessarily undermines others who also need that resource to fulfil their goals. Most labour strikes occur because there aren’t enough financial/other resources for employees.
Ambiguous Rules
o •
Ambiguous rules or lack of them in general, breed conflict. Uncertainty increases the risk that one party intends to interfere with another party’s goals
Communication Problems o
Problems in communication lead people to rely more on things such as stereotyping to understand the other party in the conflict
Interpersonal Conflict Handling Styles •
Problem Solving – problem solving tires to find a solution that is beneficial for both parties. This is known as the win-win orientation because people using this style believe the resources are expandable rather than fixed if the parties work together to find a creative solution
•
Forcing – tries to win the conflict at the other’s expense. People who use this style have a win-lose orientation – they believe the parties are drawing from a fixed pie, so the more one receives the less others gets
•
Avoiding – avoiding tries to smooth over or avoid conflict situations altogether. It represents a low concern for both self and the other party, trying to find ways to avoid the conflict
•
Yielding – involves giving in completely to the other side’s wishes, or at least cooperating with little or no attention to your own interests.
•
Compromising – Involves looking for a position in which your losses are offset by equally valued gains. Actively searches for a middle ground between the interests of two parties
Structural Approaches to Conflict Management •
Emphasizing Superordinate Goals – One of the oldest recommendations for resolving conflict is to refocus the parties’ attention around superordinate goals and away from the conflicting subordinate goals. Superordinate goals are broad goals that all parties to a dispute value and agree are important, and whose attainment requires the joint resources and effort of those parties
•
Reducing Differentiation – another way to minimize dysfunctional conflict is to reduce the differences that generate conflict. As people develop a shared repository of experiences and beliefs, they become more motivated to coordinate activities and resolve their disputes through constructive discussion.
•
Improving Communication And Mutual Understanding – This recommendation applies two principles and practices from Ch3; The Johari window model and contact hypothesis. Although both were described to increase self-awareness, they are equally valuable to improve other-awareness. The intervention should be applied only where differentiation is sufficiently low, or after is has been reduced.
•
Reducing Interdependence - there are 3 strategies to reduce interdependence that causes conflict o
Create Buffers – A buffer is any mechanism that loosens the coupling between two or more people or work units. By decoupling the relationship, buffers help reduce the potential for conflict.
o
Using Integrators – Integrators are employees who coordinate the activities of differentiated work units toward the completion of a common task. In some respects, they are like human buffers, reducing direct interaction among diverse work units
o
Combine Jobs – Combining jobs is both a form of job enrichment and a way to reduce task interdependence. Consider a toaster factory where one person inserts the heating element, another adds the sides, etc. By combining these tasks so each person makes an entire toaster, the employees have a pooled rather than sequential form of task interdependence.
•
Increasing Resources – An obvious way to reduce conflict caused by resource scarcity is to increase the amount of resources available. Often dismissed because of the costs involved
•
Clarifying Rules and Procedures – Minimizes conflict arising from ambiguities, by creating an established set of rules and procedures.
Third Party Conflict Resolution •
•
Third-party conflict resolution is any attempt by a relatively neutral person to help conflicting parties resolve their differences. There are 3 main third-party dispute resolution activities, classified by their level of control over the process and decision: o
Arbitration – Arbitrators have high control over the final decision but low control over the process. This happens when executives follow previously agreed rules of due process, listening to arguments from disputing employees, and making a binding decision.
o
Inquisition – Have high process control and high decision control because they choose which information to examine and how to examine it, and generally decide how the conflict resolution process will be handled
o
Mediation – Mediators have high control over the intervention process. Their purpose is to manage the process and context of interaction between two disputing parties. However, the final decision is made by the parties about how to resolve their differences. Thus mediators have no control over the resolution decision.
Negotiation occurs whenever two or more conflicting parties attempt to resolve their divergent goals by redefining the terms of their interdependence.
Conflict is a process in which one party perceives his or her interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party o
•
It is ultimately based on perception; it exists whenever one party BELIEVES that another might obstruct its efforts, where or not they actually intend to do so
Conflict has many consequences, some of which are outlined below; o
o
Negative Consequences
Uses otherwise productive time
Less information sharing
Higher stress, dissatisfaction, and turnover
Increases organization politics
Wastes Resources
Weakens team cohesion (conflict among team members)
Positive Consequences
Better decision making (Tests logic of arguments, questions assumptions)
More responsive to changing environment
Stronger team cohesion (conflict between team and outside opponents)
•
Constructive Conflict is a type of conflict in which people focus their discussion on the issue while maintaining respect for people having other points of view. It encourages different positions on the issue while maintaining respect for other viewpoints.
•
Relationship Conflict (AKA Socioemotional conflict) focuses on the characteristics of other individuals, rather than on the issues, as the source of conflict. The parties refer to “personality clashes” and other interpersonal incompatibilities rather than legitimate differences of opinion regarding the task or decision. o
There are 3 strategies/conditions that minimize the level of relationship conflict:
Emotional Intelligence: Relationship conflict is less likely to occur or escalate when team members have high levels of emotional intelligence. They can regulate their emotions, reducing risk of escalation
Cohesive Team: The long people work together and know each other, the more they develop a mutual trust and more room to show emotions without being personally offended
Supportive Team Norms: When team norms encourage openness, members appreciate honest dialogue without personally reacting to it.
Structural Sources of Conflict in Organizations •
Incompatible Goals o
•
Differentiation o
•
Conflict tends to increase with the level of task interdependence. It refers to the extent to which employees must share materials, information, or expertise to perform their job. Aside from complete independence, employees tend to have the lowest risk of conflict when working with others in a pooled interdependence relationship. This occurs when people work individually except for reliance on a common resource or authority
Scare Resources o
•
Differentiation – differences among people and work units regarding their training, values, beliefs, and experiences. It differs from incompatible goals; two people or departments may agree on a common goal (ex: serving customers better) but have different beliefs about how to achieve that goal.
Interdependence o
•
Goal incompatibility occurs when the goals of one person or department seem to interfere with another person’s or department’s goals
Resource scarcity generates conflict because each person or unit requiring the same resource necessarily undermines others who also need that resource to fulfil their goals. Most labour strikes occur because there aren’t enough financial/other resources for employees.
Ambiguous Rules
o •
Ambiguous rules or lack of them in general, breed conflict. Uncertainty increases the risk that one party intends to interfere with another party’s goals
Communication Problems o
Problems in communication lead people to rely more on things such as stereotyping to understand the other party in the conflict
Interpersonal Conflict Handling Styles •
Problem Solving – problem solving tires to find a solution that is beneficial for both parties. This is known as the win-win orientation because people using this style believe the resources are expandable rather than fixed if the parties work together to find a creative solution
•
Forcing – tries to win the conflict at the other’s expense. People who use this style have a win-lose orientation – they believe the parties are drawing from a fixed pie, so the more one receives the less others gets
•
Avoiding – avoiding tries to smooth over or avoid conflict situations altogether. It represents a low concern for both self and the other party, trying to find ways to avoid the conflict
•
Yielding – involves giving in completely to the other side’s wishes, or at least cooperating with little or no attention to your own interests.
•
Compromising – Involves looking for a position in which your losses are offset by equally valued gains. Actively searches for a middle ground between the interests of two parties
Structural Approaches to Conflict Management •
Emphasizing Superordinate Goals – One of the oldest recommendations for resolving conflict is to refocus the parties’ attention around superordinate goals and away from the conflicting subordinate goals. Superordinate goals are broad goals that all parties to a dispute value and agree are important, and whose attainment requires the joint resources and effort of those parties
•
Reducing Differentiation – another way to minimize dysfunctional conflict is to reduce the differences that generate conflict. As people develop a shared repository of experiences and beliefs, they become more motivated to coordinate activities and resolve their disputes through constructive discussion.
•
Improving Communication And Mutual Understanding – This recommendation applies two principles and practices from Ch3; The Johari window model and contact hypothesis. Although both were described to increase self-awareness, they are equally valuable to improve other-awareness. The intervention should be applied only where differentiation is sufficiently low, or after is has been reduced.
•
Reducing Interdependence - there are 3 strategies to reduce interdependence that causes conflict o
Create Buffers – A buffer is any mechanism that loosens the coupling between two or more people or work units. By decoupling the relationship, buffers help reduce the potential for conflict.
o
Using Integrators – Integrators are employees who coordinate the activities of differentiated work units toward the completion of a common task. In some respects, they are like human buffers, reducing direct interaction among diverse work units
o
Combine Jobs – Combining jobs is both a form of job enrichment and a way to reduce task interdependence. Consider a toaster factory where one person inserts the heating element, another adds the sides, etc. By combining these tasks so each person makes an entire toaster, the employees have a pooled rather than sequential form of task interdependence.
•
Increasing Resources – An obvious way to reduce conflict caused by resource scarcity is to increase the amount of resources available. Often dismissed because of the costs involved
•
Clarifying Rules and Procedures – Minimizes conflict arising from ambiguities, by creating an established set of rules and procedures.
Third Party Conflict Resolution •
•
Third-party conflict resolution is any attempt by a relatively neutral person to help conflicting parties resolve their differences. There are 3 main third-party dispute resolution activities, classified by their level of control over the process and decision: o
Arbitration – Arbitrators have high control over the final decision but low control over the process. This happens when executives follow previously agreed rules of due process, listening to arguments from disputing employees, and making a binding decision.
o
Inquisition – Have high process control and high decision control because they choose which information to examine and how to examine it, and generally decide how the conflict resolution process will be handled
o
Mediation – Mediators have high control over the intervention process. Their purpose is to manage the process and context of interaction between two disputing parties. However, the final decision is made by the parties about how to resolve their differences. Thus mediators have no control over the resolution decision.
Negotiation occurs whenever two or more conflicting parties attempt to resolve their divergent goals by redefining the terms of their interdependence.
