Conflict and Conflict

Management
 Intended Learning Outcomes
• Understand the different views of conflicts
• Understand the different levels of Conflicts
• Examine the different conflict handling
strategies
 What is a conflict
• a serious disagreement or argument
• dispute, quarrel, difference of opinion,
clash, incompatibility, inconsistency
• Conflict implies clash of interest. The basis of
conflict may vary but, it is always a part of society.
• Basis of conflict- personal, racial, class, caste,
political and international.
• often caused by differences of opinion,
disagreements between members, or scarcity of
resources.
 Conflict

– A process that begins when one party perceives that

another party has negatively affected, or is about to
negatively affect, something that the first party cares
about.
– Can expect a wide range of conflicts that people
experience in organizations
• Incompatibility of goals
• Differences over interpretations of facts
• Disagreements based on behavioral expectations
Transitions in Conflict Thought

• The traditional view

• The interactionist view
• Relation-focused view
Traditional View of Conflict
-The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be avoided.
-Conflict was viewed negatively and discussed with terms
such as violence,destruction and reinforce its negative
connotation.
Possible causes may include poor communication, lack of
openness, and failure to respond to employee needs etc.
Human Relations View of Conflict
The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable
outcome in any group.

Interactionist View of Conflict

The belief that conflict is not only a negative force in a
group but that it is absolutely necessary for a group to
perform effectively.
It encourages the change and innovation and it is
recognized that, a minimal level of conflict can keep a
group viable, self critical and creative.
Functional vs. Dysfunctional Conflicts
(Related to Interactionist view of
conflict)

Functional Conflict (Constructive

form)
Conflict that supports the goals of
the group and improves its
performance.
Dysfunctional Conflict
(Destructive form)
Conflict that hinders group
performance.
Primary Levels of Conflict Within Organizations

❖ Intrapersonal (within an individual)

❖ Interpersonal (between individuals)
❖ Intragroup (within a group)
❖ Intergroup (between groups)
 Intra-personal Conflicts

• Conflict Due to Frustration

– Frustration occurs when goal-directed behavior is blocked.
• Goal Conflict
– Goal conflict can come about from approach-approach,
approach-avoidance, or avoidance-avoidance situations.

● Role Conflict and Ambiguity

○ Role conflict and ambiguity result from a clash in the

expectations of the various roles possessed by an individual
and can take the forms of role conflict, intra-role conflict, or
inter-role conflict.
• Conflicts Due to Frustration
 • Goal Conflicts

Approach–approach conflict
An individual must choose among alternatives, each of
which is expected to have a positive outcome
Avoidance–avoidance conflict
An individual must choose among alternatives, each of
which is expected to have a negative outcome
Approach–avoidance conflict
An individual must decide whether to do something that
has both positive and negative outcomes. Everything
 • Role Conflicts

Inter-role conflict
Inter-role conflict arises when the requirements and
expectations of one role interfere or conflict with those
of another role.
- One lady’s role as mother is likely to conflict
occasionally with her role as a worker employed outside
the home. When one of her children becomes ill, she
may find that the demands of her job (e.g., staying at
work) are in conflict with the demands of motherhood
(e.g., taking her child to the doctor)
 Person–role conflict/ intra role
incompatible requirements within the same role –
Role requirements are incompatible with the focal person’s own
attitudes, values, or views of acceptable behavior
• Production manager play task oriented role but
employees expect employee oriented role
–One mother believe that being a good mother she has to do
a job outside of the home. She might also believe that
providing socio-emotional support to her family is a
necessary ingredient in her role as a mother.
–But her mother in law might think that to be a good
mother she would need to resign her job to provide around-
the-clock care for her children
 Conditions that Increase the Intensity of Intrapersonal
Conflict

• Several realistic alternatives are available for handling the

conflict
• The positive and negative consequences of the alternatives
are roughly equal
• The source of conflict is important to the individual
 Defense mechanisms
Aggressive Compromising Withdrawal
Fixation – an Compensation – an Flight/Withdrawal –
individual keeps up a individual attempts to make entails physically
dysfunctional behavior up for a negative situation by escaping a conflict
that obviously will not devoting himself/herself to (flight) or
solve the conflict another pursuit with psychologically
Displacement – an increased vigor escaping (withdrawal)
individual directs his or Identification – an Conversion –
her anger toward individual patterns his or her emotional conflicts
someone who is not the behavior after another’s are expressed in
source of the conflict Rationalization – a physical symptoms
Negativism – a person compromise mechanism Fantasy – provides an
responds with characterized by trying to escape from a conflict
pessimism to any justify one’s behavior by through daydreaming
attempt at solving a constructing bogus reasons
problem for it
 Consequences of intra-personal conflicts

• low job satisfaction,

• low confidence in the organization,
• high degree of job-related tension.
• Role conflict has been found to be positively related to
– job dissatisfaction,
– lack of job involvement and organizational commitment,
– tension and anxiety
– intent to leave the job,
 Managing intra-personal conflicts
• Find out as much as possible about the values of the
organization.
• Role analysis – ask the various role senders what
they expect.
• Political skills – effective politicians can negotiate
role expectations when conflicts occur.
• Understand power networks
• Recognize defense mechanisms
• Develop strategies to deal with difficult people
 Inter-personal Conflicts

• In terms of sources
– personal differences, information deficiency, role
incompatibility, and environmental stress
• In terms of response categories
– forcing, accommodating, avoiding, compromising,
and collaborating.
 Causes of inter-personal conflicts

Personality mismatches
Cultural differences
Differing points of view
having conflicting values and beliefs
 Consequences of inter-personal conflicts

- Decreased productivity
- Increased work disruptions
- Decreased team moral
- Increase in employee turnover
- Increase in absenteeism
Managing inter-personal conflicts
Thomas and Kilmann (1974)
• Avoiding: low on protecting your interests and theirs.
Avoidance can be either physical and/or psychological
• It is unassertive and uncooperative.
• This is when you simply avoid the issue. You aren’t helping
the other party reach their goals, and you aren’t assertively
pursuing your own.
• Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically sidestepping
an issue, postponing an issue until a better time, or simply
withdrawing from a threatening situation.

“I’m running away and hiding”

• Accommodating: meeting the needs of the other person but
ignoring your own needs, “giving in” to the desires of the other
– Conceding – a firmer version in which you strategically accommodate to
build relationship
– Yielding – a weaker version in which you allow the other party to control
the situation and define the conflict
• It is unassertive but cooperative—the opposite of competing.
• This is when you cooperate to a high- degree, and it may be at your own
expense, and actually work against your own goals, objectives, and desired
outcomes.
• Accommodating might take the form of selfless generosity or charity,
obeying another person’s order when you would prefer not to, or yielding to
another’s point of view.

“I give in. Let’s do it your way.”

• Competing: generally thought of as a win-lose orientation in
which you try to maximize your gains
– Forcing – trying to get others to go along with you by exerting power
over them
– Contending – a “softer form of competing” in that you are somewhat
flexible about your position while considering only your own goals
• It is assertive and uncooperative, a power-oriented mode.
• This is the “win-lose” approach. You act in a very assertive way to
achieve your goals, without seeking to cooperate with the other
party, and it may be at the expense of the other party.
• Competing might mean standing up for your rights, defending a
position you believe is correct, or simply trying to win.

“I’m going to win. No matter what”

• Compromising: involves a moderate protection of your needs
as well as theirs. Also assumes there are fixed resources
• It is intermediate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness 
This is the “lose-lose” scenario where neither party really
achieves what they want. This requires a moderate level of
assertiveness and cooperation.
• Compromising might mean splitting the difference,
exchanging concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground
position.

“I give. You give.”

• Collaborating: When you are interested in maximizing your
own gains as well as the other’s. Problem-solving style in
which the parties work together against the problem.
• It is both assertive and cooperative.
• This is where you partner or pair up with the other party to achieve
both of your goals. This is how you break free of the “win-lose”
paradigm and seek the “win-win.”
• Collaborating between two persons might take the form of exploring
a disagreement to learn from each other’s insights, resolving some
condition that would otherwise have them competing for resources,
or confronting and trying to find a creative solution to an
interpersonal problem.

“Together we are better.”

 Selecting Conflict Management Styles

• Five key diagnostic questions

– How important are the issues to you?
– How important are the issues to the other?
– How important is it to maintain a positive relationship?
– How much time pressure is there?
– To what extent does one party trust the other?
 When Each Style is the Best

• Avoiding
– When the issue is trivial to you
– When there is no long-term relationship
– When you are the low power party in a serious power
imbalance
• Competing
– When the other will be very competitive
– When important others expect you to compete
– AND when the stakes are high
 When Each Style is the Best
• Accommodating
– When the issue is trivial to you
– When harmony in the relationship is all important
– When you are the low power party in a serious power
imbalance
– When you want to build trust in the other by demonstrating a
protection of their interests
• Compromising
– When there are truly finite resources
– When there are no means to increase the divisible resources
• Collaborating
– When the issue is complex and requires creativity
– When there is a long-term relationship
– When their implementation of the decision is necessary
 Intra-group Conflict
• the incompatibility, incongruence, or disagreement
among the members of a group or its subgroups
regarding goals, functions, or activities of the group.
• majority of the members of a group or its subgroups
must be involved.
 Sources of intra-group conflicts
• Leadership Style - Leadership can influence other variables,
such as task structure, group composition, and size.

• Task Structure
– Routine (Simple, defined goals, procedures)
– Non-routine (Complex)
• Group Composition
• Size
• Cohesiveness and Groupthink
• External threats
 Effects of intra-group conflicts

• Quality and quantity of team performance are considerably

higher in competitive than cooperative conditions,
• Heterogeneous members and consequent conflicts of interest
and opinion produce better solutions to standardized sets of
solutions.
• Affective conflict negatively influences group performance,
group loyalty, work-group commitment, job satisfaction, and
intent to stay in the present organization.
 Managing intra-group conflicts

• Process related interventions

– Team building
• Structural related interventions
– Change group membership
– Changing the group size
– Altering the task
– Changing the reward system
– Modifying rules, procedures and appeal system.
 Inter-group Conflict
• Refers to the collective incompatibility or
disagreement between two or more divisions,
departments, or subsystems in connection with,
– tasks,
– resources,
– information,
• This form of conflict implies each member of a
group is in conflict with those of another, the
actual dispute is carried out between
representatives,
– department heads,
– labour-management negotiators
 Cont’d.
• law of intergroup conflict - all groups are in partial conflict
with each other
• It is very common in complex organizations having
differentiated subsystems with,
– different goals,
– norms, and
– orientations
• To increase overall effectiveness, complex organisations create
different subsystems with homogeneous tasks and distinct goals.
• Interface conflict (Blake & Mouton, 1984)
• examples of organizational intergroup conflict are between
– Line and staff,
– Manufacturing and sales,
– Production and maintenance,
– Headquarters and field staffs, and
– Labour and management
 Dynamics of inter-group conflict

• Social identity theory posits that individuals tend to

classify themselves and others into various social
categories.
• Causes individuals to compare their in-group–with out-
group and to perceive the in-group as preferable, even in
the absence of intergroup conflict.
• Perceived in-group–out-group similarity can be
threatening,
 Sources of inter-group conflicts
• System Differentiation
• Task Interdependence: three categories of interdependence

– Pooled interdependence refers to a situation where the groups are relatively independent of each
other,
– Sequential interdependence exists where the output of one unit becomes the input of another unit,
as in the case of automobile assembly line activities,
– Reciprocal interdependence, the outputs of one group become the input of other groups, in any
direction.
• Dependence on Scarce Resources
– the greater the perceived dependence on common resources, the greater is the
possibility of intergroup conflict.
• Jurisdictional Ambiguity
– purchasing and production or between line and staff
• Relationship Between Line and Staff
– the success of staff depends on the acceptance of their ideas by the line. But the
success of line does not necessarily depend on the staff advice, which line can
have when it pleases.
 Behavioural and Perceptual outcomes of inter-group
conflicts
• When intergroup conflict of win–lose orientation occurs, the
groups become more cohesive.
• Team conformity and loyalty to the group increase,
• win–lose intergroup conflict creates significant distortions in
the judgment and perceptual processes of the conflicting
groups.
• Two types of errors occur that tend to magnify the differences
between groups and escalate the conflict,
– The two groups fail to see the similarities in their solutions and see
only the differences between their solutions.
– The other kind of perceptual error relates to the belief of the in-group
members that their solutions are superior to those of the out-group.
• Formation of structures
– emergence of autocratic leaders and the
establishment of a new power structure,
– There is also greater pressure on the leader to
carry out the wishes of the in-group when
interacting.
– A structure of interaction is formulated, rules and
procedures are established prohibiting intergroup
communication.
Consequences of Inter-group Conflict
 Managing inter-group conflicts

• Process related interventions are useful when

the intergroup conflict is strategic rather than
frictional or minor.
– problem solving (help the members of two groups
to learn the integrating style to handle their
differences), and
– organizational mirroring ( appropriate when more
than two groups are having problems in working
together)
 Intergroup Problem Solving

• Blake and Mouton (1984) have discussed the following conventional

approaches to the resolution of intergroup conflict,
1. Cooperation by edict.
2. Negotiations.
3. Leadership replacement.
4. Personnel rotation.
5. Structural solutions.
6. Liaison persons.(Form a working relationship between two groups
to their mutual benefit)
7. Flexible reporting relationships.
8. Mediation and arbitration
• Problem solving process:
– 1. Problem Formulation
– 2. Problem Solution
– 3. Implementation Plan.
– 4. Implementation of the Plan.
– 5. Implementation Review.
 Organizational Mirroring

• a technique designed to analyze work units’ feedback on

how other elements of the organization are viewed by them
• Includes a set of activities in which host group receives
feedback about how it is perceived and regarded from reps
across organization
• designed to improve the relationship among three or more
groups
• Requires careful planning and management through an
efficient consultant
• suitable where the solution of an interface problem requires
the collaboration of several work-related groups
• Structure related interventions
• Analysis of Task Interdependence
• Structural changes also may be made by the superior through
authoritative command.
• Intergroup conflict may be increased or reduced by hiring,
transferring, or exchanging group members to increase
homogeneity-heterogeneity within-between groups.
• Intergroup conflict may be altered by clarifying and
formulating rules and procedures that affect intergroup
relationship,
– altering the system of communication between groups;
– developing an appeals system; and
– Providing valid information to reduce distortion.
 Conflict Aftermath
(The consequences of conflicts)

• If bargaining is utilized as a method of conflict

resolution, both groups will perceive
themselves as partly losers,
• If a third party imposes a solution on the
conflicting groups, there is a possibility that a
victor and a vanquished will be created.
• the outcomes of win–lose type of intergroup
conflict will probably be dysfunctional for the
organization.
-Thank You-