13: conflict and negotiation -...

Chapter 13 Conflict and negotiation Page

Chapter 13Conflict and NegotiationClick on the title to access video teaching notes.

Chapter Overview

Managers in organizations need to be able to effectively deal with conflict and to negotiate with people inside and outside of the organization. These two skill sets are critical for managerial success.

Chapter Objectives

After studying this chapter, the student should be able to: 1. Define conflict and differentiate between the traditional, interactionist, and

managed-conflict views of conflict.2. Outline the conflict process.3. Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.4. Apply the five steps of the negotiation process.5. Show how individual differences influence negotiations.6. Describe cultural differences in negotiations.

Suggested Lecture Outline

I. INTRODUCTIONA. This chapter examines both the positive and negative impacts of conflict, as well as

describing how conflicts develop. B. One of the ways to end conflict, negotiation, is also presented.

II. A DEFINITION OF CONFLICTA. Conflict: A process that begins when one party perceives

another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about.1. Broad Scope. This definition is purposely kept broad to encompass those

activities in which an interaction “crosses over” to become an interparty conflict: incompatibility of goals, differences over interpretations of facts, and disagreements based on behavioral expectations.

2. Flexibility. This definition is flexible enough to cover the full range of conflict levels, from overt and violent acts to subtle forms of disagreement.

III. TRANSITIONS IN CONFLICT THOUGHT A. It is entirely appropriate to say there has been conflict over

the role of conflict in groups and organizations with three views proposed.1. The Traditional View has argued that conflict must be avoided—that it indicates

a malfunctioning within the group.

Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

PPT 13.1

PPT 13.2

PPT 13.3

PPT 13.4

182

http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob2/ch13.html


2. The Interactionist view proposes not only that conflict can be a positive force in a group but that some conflict is absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively.

3. The Managed Conflict view argues that instead of encouraging “good” or discouraging “bad” conflict, it’s more important to resolve naturally occurring conflicts productively.

B. The Traditional View of Conflict. 1. In the earliest approach (1930s through 1940s) to

conflict in organizations, it was assumed that all conflict was harmful and needed to be avoided.

2. Conflict was seen as 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.

3. This somewhat simplistic view of conflict allowed for relatively easy solutions: seek out the sources of conflict and correct those malfunctions.

4. While still commonly held in the workplace, this view is not aligned with modern research findings.

C. The Interactionist View of Conflict. 1. The 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.

2. The major contribution of this view is recognizing that a minimal level of conflict can help keep a group viable, self-critical, and creative.

3. Functional Conflict. Conflict that supports the goals of the group and improves its performance: it is constructive.

4. Dysfunctional Conflict. Conflicts that hinder group performance: it is destructive.

5. Look at the type of conflict. a. Task Conflict. This type of conflict relates to the

content and goals of the work. High levels of task conflict become dysfunctional when they create uncertainty about task roles; increase the time needed to complete tasks; or lead to members working at cross-purposes. Low-to-moderate levels of task conflict are functional as they consistently demonstrate a positive effect on group performance as it stimulates discussion of ideas.

b. Relationship Conflict. This type of conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships. Almost all conflict of this type is dysfunctional and its resolution can consume a fair portion of a manager’s time.

c. Process Conflict. This final type of conflict relates to how the work is accomplished. Low levels of process conflict are functional, while moderate-to-high levels of process conflict are dysfunctional.

D. Resolution Focused View of Conflict1. Researchers, including those who had strongly advocated the interactionist

view, have begun to recognize some problems with encouraging conflict. a. There are some very specific cases in which conflict can be beneficial. b. However, workplace conflicts are not productive; they take time away from

job tasks or interacting with customers, and hurt feelings and anger often linger after conflicts appear to be over.


PPT 13.5

PPT 13.6

183


c. People seldom can wall off their feelings into neat categories of “task” or “relationship” disagreements, so task conflicts sometimes escalate into relationship conflicts.

d. Conflicts produce stress, which may lead people to become more close minded and adversarial.

2. Studies of conflict in laboratories also fail to take account of the reductions in trust and cooperation that occur even with relationship conflicts. a. Longer-term studies show that all conflicts reduce trust, respect, and

cohesion in groups, which reduces their long-term viability.b. In sum, the traditional view took a shortsighted view in assuming all conflict

should be eliminated. 3. The interactionist view that conflict can stimulate active discussion without

spilling over into negative, disruptive emotions is incomplete. 4. The managed conflict perspective does recognize that conflict is probably

inevitable in most organizations, and it focuses more on productive conflict resolution.

5. The research pendulum has swung from eliminating conflict, to encouraging limited levels of conflict, and now to finding constructive methods for resolving conflicts productively so their disruptive influence can be minimized.

IV. THE CONFLICT PROCESSA. There are five stages in the conflict process.

1. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility. a. This indicates the presence of conditions that create

opportunities for conflict to arise. b. These conditions don’t need to directly lead to

conflict, but one of these conditions is necessary for conflict to surface. c. There are three general categories of these conditions

(causes or sources of conflict): 1) Communication. This source of conflict arises

from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise” in the communication channels. Differing word connotations, jargon, insufficient exchange information, and other barriers to communication are potential antecedents to conflict. a) The potential for conflict increases when:

(1) Communication barriers exist.(2) Too little or too much communication takes place.

2. Structure. a. This includes variables such as

1) size, 2) degree of specialization in the tasks assigned to group members, 3) jurisdictional clarity, 4) member-goal compatibly, 5) leadership styles, 6) reward systems, and 7) the degree of dependence between groups.

b. The potential for conflict increases when: 1) Groups are larger or more specialized. 2) Group members are younger or have less tenure.


Exhibit 13.1

PPT 13.7

PPT 13.8

184


3) Turnover is high. 4) Jurisdiction and/or responsibility for action are ambiguous.5) Diversity of goals exists among groups.6) Reward systems are designed so that one member gains at another's

expense. 7) The group is dependent upon another group.8) One group can gain at another group’s expense.

3. Personal Variables. a. Personality types, values, and emotions can lead to conflict.b. The potential for conflict increases when:

1) Conflict-oriented personality types, such as highly authoritarian or dogmatic personalities, exist in the work group.

2) Members who are highly emotional in the work environment (no matter what the cause of those emotions).

B. Stage II: Cognition and Personalization. 1. If the antecedent conditions of the first stage negatively

affect something one party cares about, then the potential for conflict or incompatibility becomes actualized in the second stage.

2. As we noted in our definition of conflict, one or more of the parties must be aware that antecedent conditions exist. a. However, because a conflict is a perceived conflict does not mean it is

personalized. b. In other words, “A may be aware that B and A are in serious disagreement . . .

but it may not make A tense or anxious, and it may have no effect whatsoever on A’s affection toward B.”11 It is at the felt conflict level, when individuals become emotionally involved, that parties experience anxiety, tension, frustration, or hostility.

3. Keep in mind two points. a. First, stage II is important because it’s where conflict issues tend to be

defined. 1) This is the point when the parties decide what the conflict is about.2) The definition of a conflict is important because it typically delineates

the set of possible settlements. b. Second, emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions.

1) Negative emotions allow us to oversimplify issues, lose trust, and put negative interpretations on the other party’s behavior.

2) In contrast, positive feelings increase our tendency to see potential relationships among the elements of a problem, take a broader view of the situation, and develop more innovative solutions.

C. Stage III: Intentions. 1. Intentions intervene between people’s perceptions and

emotions and their overt behavior. a. They are decisions to act in a given way.b. We separate out intentions as a distinct stage because we have to infer the

other’s intent to know how to respond to his or her behavior. c. A lot of conflicts are escalated simply because one party attributes the

wrong intentions to the other.


PPT 13.9

PPT 13.10

185


d. There is also typically a great deal of slippage between intentions and behavior, so behavior does not always accurately reflect a person’s intentions.

2. Using two dimensions—cooperativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concerns) and assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns)—we can identify five conflict-handling intentions: competing (assertive and uncooperative), collaborating (assertive and cooperative), avoiding (unassertive and uncooperative), accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and compromising (midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness).a. Competing.

1) When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests regardless of the impact on the other parties to the conflict, that person is competing.

2) You compete when you place a bet that only one person can win, for example.

b. Collaborating. 1) When parties in conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of all

parties, there is cooperation and a search for a mutually beneficial outcome.

2) In collaborating, the parties intend to solve a problem by clarifying differences rather than by accommodating various points of view.

3) If you attempt to find a win–win solution that allows both parties’ goals to be completely achieved, that’s collaborating.

c. Avoiding. 1) A person may recognize a conflict exists and want to withdraw from or

suppress it. 2) Examples of avoiding include trying to ignore a conflict and avoiding

others with whom you disagree.d. Accommodating.

1) A party who seeks to appease an opponent may be willing to place the opponent’s interests above his or her own, sacrificing to maintain the relationship.

2) We refer to this intention as accommodating. 3) Supporting someone else’s opinion despite your reservations about it,

for example, is accommodating.e. Compromising.

1) In compromising, there is no clear winner or loser. 2) Rather, there is a willingness to ration the object of the conflict and

accept a solution that provides incomplete satisfaction of both parties’ concerns.

3) The distinguishing characteristic of compromising, therefore, is that each party intends to give up something.

3. Intentions are not always fixed. 1) During the course of a conflict, they might change if the parties are able

to see the other’s point of view or respond emotionally to the other’s behavior.


186


2) However, research indicates people have preferences among the five conflict-handling intentions we just described and tend to rely on them quite consistently.

3) We can predict a person’s intentions rather well from a combination of intellectual and personality characteristics.

D. Stage IV: Behavior. 1. When most people think of conflict situations, they tend

to focus on stage IV because this is where conflicts become visible.

2. The behavior stage includes the statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties, usually as overt attempts to implement their own intentions.

3. As a result of miscalculations or unskilled enactments, overt behaviors sometimes deviate from these original intentions.

4. It helps to think of stage IV as a dynamic process of interaction. 5. For example,

a. you make a demand on me, b. I respond by arguing, you threaten me, c. I threaten you back, and so on.

6. Exhibit 13.2 provides a way of visualizing conflict behavior. a. All conflicts exist somewhere along this continuum. b. At the lower part are conflicts characterized by subtle,

indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension, such as a student questioning in class a point the instructor has just made.

c. Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum until they become highly destructive.

d. Strikes, riots, and wars clearly fall in this upper range. e. For the most part, you should assume conflicts that reach the upper ranges

of the continuum are almost always dysfunctional. f. Functional conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the

continuum. g. If a conflict is dysfunctional, what can the parties do to de-escalate it? h. Or, conversely, what options exist if conflict is too low and needs to be

increased? 1) This brings us to techniques of conflict management. We have already

described several as conflict-handling intentions. 2) Under ideal conditions, a person’s intentions should translate into

comparable behaviors.E. Stage V: Outcomes.

1. The action–reaction interplay between the conflicting parties results in consequences.

2. As our model demonstrates (see Exhibit 13.1), these outcomes may be functional, if the conflict improves the group’s performance, or dysfunctional, if it hinders performance.

3. Functional Outcomes. a. Normally associated with low-to-moderate levels of

task and process conflict (and excluding relationship conflict) these outcomes result in an improvement in the group's performance.


Exhibit 13.2

PPT 13.11

PPT 13.12

PPT 13.13

187


b. Functional Outcome Indicators. Conflicts can be considered to have functional outcomes when any of the following end-conditions exist.1) The quality of decisions is improved by allowing multiple points of view

to be considered: reduces the potential for groupthink. 2) Creativity and innovation are stimulated by challenging the status quo.3) Interest and curiosity among group members is encouraged.4) Problems are aired and tensions are released.5) An environment of self-evaluation and change is created.

c. Research Results. 1) Studies in diverse settings confirm the functionality of conflict and its

ability to increase group performance. 2) Additionally, heterogeneous groups (those with a greater likelihood for

conflict than homogenous groups) were also found to produce higher-quality solutions.

4. Dysfunctional Outcomes. a. Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common

ties, and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.b. Dysfunctional Outcome Indicators.

1) Group effectiveness is reduced.2) Group communication is retarded.3) Group cohesiveness is reduced.4) Group goals are subordinated to infighting among members.5) The group is threatened with destruction.

c. Research Results. 1) A substantial body of the literature has shown dysfunctional conflict to

reduce group effectiveness.5. Managing Functional Conflict

a. If managers recognize that in some situations conflict can be beneficial, what can they do to manage conflict effectively in their organizations?

b. One common ingredient in organizations that successfully manage functional conflict is that they reward dissent and punish conflict avoiders. 1) This is easier said than done.2) It takes discipline and patience to accept news you don’t wish to hear

(from dissenters) and to force avoiders to speak up.3) Groups that resolve conflicts successfully discuss differences of opinion

openly and are prepared to manage conflict when it arises. 4) The most disruptive conflicts are those that are never addressed

directly. 5) An open discussion makes it much easier to develop a shared perception

of the problems at hand; it also allows groups to work toward a mutually acceptable solution.

c. Managers need to emphasize shared interests in resolving conflicts, so groups that disagree with one another don’t become too entrenched in their points of view and start to take the conflicts personally.

d. Groups with cooperative conflict styles and a strong underlying identification to the overall group goals are more effective than groups with a more competitive style.

V. NEGOTIATION


PPT 13.14

188


A. Negotiation permeates the interactions of almost everyone in groups and organizations.1. There’s the obvious: Labor bargains with management. 2. There’s the not-so-obvious: Managers negotiate with employees, peers, and

bosses; salespeople negotiate with customers; purchasing agents negotiate with suppliers.

3. And there’s the subtle: An employee agrees to cover for a colleague for a few minutes in exchange for some past or future benefit.

4. In today’s loosely structured organizations, in which members work with colleagues over whom they have no direct authority and with whom they may not even share a common boss, negotiation skills become critical.

5. We can define negotiation as a process that occurs when two or more parties decide how to allocate scarce resources. a. Although we commonly think of the outcomes of negotiation in one-shot

economic terms, like negotiating over the price of a car, every negotiation in organizations also affects the relationship between the negotiators and the way the negotiators feel about themselves.

b. Depending on how much the parties are going to interact with one another, sometimes maintaining the social relationship and behaving ethically will be just as important as the immediate outcome of each bargain.

6. Note that we use the terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably. a. In this section, we contrast two bargaining strategies, provide a model of the

negotiation process, ascertain the role of moods and personality traits on bargaining, review gender and cultural differences in negotiation, and take a brief look at third-party negotiations.

B. Bargaining Strategies. 1. There are two general approaches to negotiation:

distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining. 2. Distributive Bargaining.

a. This type of bargaining operates under zero-sum (or “fixed pie”) conditions: one party’s gains reflect losses by the other.

b. A classic example of this type of bargaining is labor-management negotiations over wages.

c. Distributive Bargaining Zones. This model reflects zero-sum distributive bargaining positions. Each party is a negotiator. 1) Each has a unique target point (what he or she would like to achieve)

and resistance point (the lowest acceptable outcome before negotiations are broken off).

2) The area between each negotiator’s target and resistance points is that negotiator’s aspiration range. a) If the two ranges overlap, this common area is referred to as the

settlement range. 3) When you are engaged in distributive bargaining, research consistently

shows one of the best things you can do is make the first offer—and make it an aggressive one.


Exhibit 13.3

Exhibit 13.4

PPT 13.15

PPT 13.16

189


a) One reason for this is that making the first offer shows power; individuals in power are much more likely to make initial offers, speak first at meetings, and thereby gain the advantage.

b) Another reason is the anchoring bias. People tend to fixate on initial information.

c) Once that anchoring point is set, they fail to adequately adjust it based on subsequent information.

4) A savvy negotiator sets an anchor with the initial offer, and scores of negotiation studies show that such anchors greatly favor the person who sets it.

3. Integrative Bargaining. a. This type of bargaining operates under the assumption

that one or more settlements can create a win-win solution.

b. In terms of intraorganizational behavior, all things being equal, integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining because the former builds long-term relationships.1) Integrative bargaining bonds negotiators and allows them to leave the

bargaining table feeling they have achieved a victory. Distributive bargaining, however, leaves one party a loser.

2) It tends to build animosities and deepen divisions when people have to work together on an ongoing basis.

c. Research shows that over repeated bargaining episodes, when the “losing” party feels positive about the negotiation outcome, he is much more likely to bargain cooperatively in subsequent negotiations.

d. This points to an important advantage of integrative negotiations: even when you “win,” you want your opponent to feel good about the negotiation.

a. Necessary Conditions. Because of these requirements for integrative bargaining, is not as common in business as perhaps it should be.1) Parties must be open with information and candid about their concerns.2) There must be sensitivity by both parties regarding the other's needs.3) The parties must be able to trust each other.4) Both parties must be willing to maintain flexibility.

b. Integrative Bargaining Tactics. To achieve higher joint-gain settlements, put more issues on the table: this allows for better outcome as issues are traded. 1) Avoid compromise as it reduces the pressure to bargain integratively.

c. Results of Using Integrative Bargaining. This is the preferable means of bargaining as it builds long-term relationships and positive feelings about the other party for both parties.

B. Negotiation Process. 1. This simplified model of the negotiation process is

composed of five steps.a. Step One: Preparation and Planning.

1) Before you start negotiating, you need to do your homework.a) What’s the nature of the conflict? b) What’s the history leading up to this negotiation? c) Who’s involved and what are their perceptions of the conflict?


Exhibit 13.5

PPT 13.17

PPT 13.18

190


d) What do you want from the negotiation? e) What are your goals?

(1) It often helps to put your goals in writing and develop a range of outcomes—from “most hopeful” to “minimally acceptable”—to keep your attention focused.

(2) You also want to assess what you think are the other party’s goals.

(3) What are they likely to ask/request? (4) How entrenched is their position likely to be? (5) What intangible or hidden interests may be important to them? (6) On what might they be willing to settle?(7) When you can anticipate your opponent’s position, you are

better equipped to counter arguments with the facts and figures that support your position.

2) Determine Strategic Limits. a) An important consideration in any negotiation is to determine the

best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) for both the negotiator and the opponent.

b) This is similar in concept to a resistance point: the negotiator must determine when it is better strategically to cease negotiations and accept some other alternative.

c) One possible negotiation strategy is to get the opponent to modify his or her BATNA to increase the settlement range.

b. Step Two: Definition of Ground Rules. 1) In this initial stage of negotiations, the methodology of the negotiation

itself is determined. 2) The step determines the who, what, when, and how of the negotiation

process. 3) The initial proposals or demands will be exchanged between the parties.

c. Step Three: Clarification and Justification. 1) In this step each party will explain, amplify, clarify, bolster, and justify

the original demands or proposals. 2) This step should be more explanatory in nature, rather than

confrontational; it should be used to build understanding between the parties.

d. Step Four: Bargaining and Problem Solving. 1) This step is what is typically thought of as negotiations. 2) It is the actual give-and-take necessary to accomplish agreement. 3) It is likely that both parties will have to make some concessions in order

to reach agreement.e. Step Five: Closure and Implementation.

1) The final step in the process is formalizing the negotiated agreement and developing any necessary procedures for implementing and monitoring that agreement.

2) This step can be accomplished by anything from creating a formal contract through simply shaking hands on it.

C. Individual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness.


PPT 13.19

191


1. Can you predict an opponent’s negotiating tactics if you know something about his or her personality? a. Because personality and negotiation outcomes are related but only weakly,

the answer is, at best, “sort of.”b. Negotiators who are agreeable or extraverted are not very successful in

distributive bargaining.1) Because extraverts are outgoing and friendly, they tend to share more

information than they should. 2) And agreeable people are more interested in finding ways to cooperate

rather than to butt heads. c. These traits, although slightly helpful in integrative negotiations, are

liabilities when interests are opposed. 1) So the best distributive bargainer appears to be a disagreeable introvert

—someone more interested in his or her own outcomes than in pleasing the other party and having a pleasant social exchange.

2) People who are highly interested in having positive relationships with other people, and who are not very concerned about their own outcomes, are especially poor negotiators.

3) These people tend to be very anxious about disagreements and plan to give in quickly to avoid unpleasant conflicts even before negotiations start.

2. Moods/Emotions in Negotiations. a. Do moods and emotions influence negotiation?

1) They do, but the way they do appears to depend on the type of negotiation. In distributive negotiations,

2) it appears that negotiators in a position of power or equal status who show anger negotiate better outcomes because their anger induces concessions from their opponents.

3) This appears to hold true even when the negotiators are instructed to show anger despite not being truly angry.

4) On the other hand, for those in a less powerful position, displaying anger leads to worse outcomes. So if you’re a boss negotiating with a peer or a subordinate, displaying anger may help you, but if you’re an employee negotiating with a boss, it might hurt you.

b. In integrative negotiations, in contrast, positive moods and emotions appear to lead to more integrative agreements (higher levels of joint gain). 1) This may happen because, as we noted in a previous chapter, positive

mood is related to creativity.3. Gender Differences in Negotiation.

a. although men and women do not tend to negotiate differently, the negotiation outcomes do differ based on gender.

b. Men have been found to negotiate better outcomes than women do, although the difference is relatively small.

c. The stereotype that women are “nice” in negotiations may have more to do with their traditionally lower power level in organizations than with their gender.

d. When typical gender stereotypes are activated, (women are nice and men are tough), it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and the negotiator will act


192


according to type. People who break gender stereotypes (nice men or tough women) are penalized in negotiations.

VI. GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS A. Conflict and Culture

1. Research suggests that differences across countries in conflict resolution strategies may be based on collectivistic tendencies and motives.

2. Collectivist cultures see people as deeply embedded in social situations, whereas individualist cultures see people as autonomous.

3. As a result, collectivists are more likely to seek to preserve relationships and promote the good of the group as a whole than individualists.

4. To preserve peaceful relationships, collectivists will avoid direct expression of conflicts, preferring to use more indirect methods for resolving differences of opinion.

5. Collectivists may also be more interested in demonstrations of concern and working through third parties to resolve disputes, whereas individualists will be more likely to confront differences of opinion directly and openly.

6. Some research does support this theory.7. Compared to collectivist Japanese negotiators, their more individualist U.S.

counterparts are more likely to see offers from their counterparts as unfair and to reject them.

8. Another study revealed that whereas U.S. managers were more likely to use competing tactics in the face of conflicts, compromising and avoiding are the most preferred methods of conflict management in China.

9. Interview data, however, suggests top management teams in Chinese high technology firms preferred integration even more than compromising and avoiding.

B. Cultural Differences in Negotiations1. Compared with the research on conflict, there is more research on how

negotiating styles vary across national cultures.2. One study compared U.S. and Japanese negotiators and found the generally

conflict-avoidant Japanese negotiators tended to communicate indirectly and adapt their behaviors to the situation.

3. A follow-up study showed that whereas among U.S. managers making early offers led to the anchoring effect we noted when discussing distributive negotiation, for Japanese negotiators early offers led to more information sharing and better integrative outcomes.

4. In another study, managers with high levels of economic power from Hong Kong, which is a high power-distance country, were more cooperative in negotiations over a shared resource than German and U.S. managers, who were lower in power distance.a. This suggests that in high power-distance countries, those in positions of

power might exercise more restraint.5. Another study looked at verbal and nonverbal negotiation tactics exhibited by

North Americans, Japanese, and Brazilians during half-hour bargaining sessions.a. Some of the differences were particularly interesting.

1) The Brazilians on average said “no” 83 times, compared to 5 times for the Japanese and 9 times for the North Americans.


PPT 13.20

193


2) The Japanese displayed more than 5 periods of silence lasting longer than 10 seconds during the 30-minute sessions.

3) North Americans averaged 3.5 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 2.5 to 3 times more often than either.

5) Finally, the Japanese and the North Americans had no physical contact with their opponents during negotiations except for handshaking, but the Brazilians touched each other almost 5 times every half hour.

VII. IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS1. Although many people assume conflict lowers group and

organizational performance, this assumption is frequently incorrect. Conflict can be either constructive or destructive to the functioning of a group or unit.

2. As shown in Exhibit 13.6, levels of conflict can be either too high or too low. Either extreme hinders performance.

3. An optimal level is one that prevents stagnation, stimulates creativity, allows tensions to be released, and initiates the seeds of change, without being disruptive or preventing coordination of activities.

4. Managing Conflicta. Competition. Use this method when:

1) Quick, decisive action is vital (emergencies).2) Deciding important issues for which unpopular actions need to be

implemented (such as cost cutting and discipline).3) Deciding issues vital to the organization's welfare when you know you

are right and your opponents are wrong.4) Negotiating with people who take advantage of noncompetitive

behavior.b. Collaboration. Use this method when:

1) There is a need to find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised.

2) Your objective is to learn.3) The desire is to merge insights from people with different perspectives.4) Wishing to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a

consensus.5) Working through feelings that interfered with the relationship.

c. Avoidance. Use this method when:1) The issue is trivial, or when issues that are more important are pressing.2) You perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns.3) The potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution.4) You desire to let people cool down and regain perspective.5) Gathering information supersedes the need for an immediate decision.6) Others can resolve the conflict more effectively.7) Issues seem tangential or symptomatic of other issues.

d. Accommodation. Use this method when:1) You find you are wrong and wish to allow a better position to be heard in

order to learn and to show your reasonableness.


Exhibit 13.6

PPT 13.21

194


2) Issues are more important to others than to yourself and you wish to satisfy others and maintain cooperation.

3) You wish to build social credits for later issues.4) You desire to minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing.5) Harmony and stability are especially important.6) You wish to allow subordinates to develop by learning from their

mistakes.e. Compromise. Use this method when:

1) Goals are important but not worth the potential disruption caused by approaches that are more assertive.

2) Opponents have power equal to yours and they are committed to mutually exclusive goals.

3) Desiring to achieve temporary settlements to complex issues. 4) Wishing to arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure.5) Needing a backup when collaboration or competition is unsuccessful.

5. Negotiation is an ongoing activity in groups and organizations. a. Distributive bargaining can resolve disputes, but it often

negatively affects the satisfaction of one or more negotiators because it is focused on the short term and because it is confrontational.

b. Integrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to provide outcomes that satisfy all parties and that build lasting relationships.

c. When engaged in negotiation, make sure you set aggressive goals and try to find creative ways to achieve the goals of both parties, especially when you value the long-term relationship with the other party.

d. That doesn’t mean sacrificing your self-interest; rather, it means trying to find creative solutions that give both parties what they really want.

VII. KEEP IN MIND A. Conflict is an inherent part of organizational life: probably

necessary for optimal organizational functionB. Task conflict is the most constructiveC. Most effective negotiators use both types of bargaining and know the appropriate

VIII. SUMMARY

Discussion Questions

1. Define conflict.Answer: Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about.

2. Differentiate between the traditional, human relations, and interactionist views of conflict.Answer: The Traditional View: in the earliest approach (1930s through 1940s) to conflict in organizations, it was assumed that all conflict was harmful and needed to be avoided. Conflict was seen as 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. This somewhat simplistic view of conflict allowed for relatively easy solutions: seek out


PPT 13.22

PPT 13.23

PPT 13.24

195


the sources of conflict and correct those malfunctions. The Human Relations View: this view dominated conflict theory from the late 1940s to the mid-1970s. The belief was that conflict is a natural occurrence in all groups and organizations and as such, should be accepted rather than removed. Proponents claimed that conflict may even benefit a group’s performance. The Interactionist View: this most recent view of conflict moves beyond accepting conflict in groups and organizations to actively encouraging it. It is believed that encouraging group leaders to maintain an ongoing minimum level of conflict keeps groups viable, self-critical, and creative. Not all conflict is to be encouraged however, there are two main categories: functional and dysfunctional.

3. Contrast task, relationship, and process conflict.Answer: Task Conflict: this type of conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. High levels of task conflict become dysfunctional when they create uncertainty about task roles; increase the time needed to complete tasks; or lead to members working at cross-purposes. Low-to-moderate levels of task conflict are functional as they consistently demonstrate a positive effect on group performance. Relationship Conflict: this type of conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships. Almost all conflict of this type is dysfunctional. Process Conflict: this type of conflict relates to how the work is accomplished. Low levels of process conflict are functional, while moderate-to-high levels of process conflict are dysfunctional.

4. Outline the conflict process.Answer: There are five stages in the conflict process: (1) potential opposition or compatibility, in which there is a reason for conflict, (2) cognition and personalization, where the potential for conflict is recognized and perhaps felt, (3) intentions, where the feelings generated by the felt conflict are focused by behavioral intentions, (4) behavior, the actual physical and verbal aspects of the conflict and (5) outcomes, the consequences of the behavior.

5. Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.Answer: Distributive Bargaining: this type of bargaining operates under zero-sum (or “fixed pie”) conditions: one party’s gains reflect losses by the other. Integrative Bargaining: this type of bargaining operates under the assumption that one or more settlements can create a win-win solution. Unlike distributive bargaining, for integrative bargaining, the negotiator’s true interests must be disclosed to the other party, which requires a certain amount of trust. Additionally, both parties must be aware of the other party's interests and sensitive to their needs. The exact opposite conditions exist in distributive bargaining.

6. Identify the five steps in the negotiation process.Answer: (1) Preparation and planning, (2) definition of ground rules, (3) clarification and justification, (4) bargaining and problem solving, and (5) closure and implementation.

7. Discuss whether there are individual differences in negotiator effectiveness.Answer: There are three such differences. (1) Personality. There is little evidence to support the idea that personality can predict negotiation ability. However, it may be that several of the Big Five traits are related to negotiation outcomes. A disagreeable introvert may be the best distributive bargainer; agreeable or extroverted people are not very successful. Individuals who are strongly concerned with appearing confident or successful in negotiations tend to have a negative effect on the outcome of the negotiation process, no matter which type of negotiation is being pursued. (2) Gender. While men and women do not tend to negotiate differently, the negotiation outcomes do differ based on gender. Men have been


196


found to negotiate better outcomes than do women, although the difference is relatively small. When typical gender stereotypes are activated, (women are nice and men are tough), it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and the negotiator will act according to type. Women's attitudes toward negotiation and toward themselves as negotiators are quite different from and more negative than are those of men.

Exercises1. Self-analysis. Remember your last negotiation activity. This activity could have

been as simple as asking someone out for a date or as complex as trying to purchase a home. Describe that negotiation using the terms and concepts from this chapter. What could you have done better to increase your likelihood of success in the negotiation? Be specific.

2. Web Crawling. Using your favorite search engine, seek out the term “conflict management.” Find five different and varied sources (perhaps one from a consultant, one from an institute of higher learning, one from a government source, one from a general-purpose site, and one from a business site) and read them carefully to see what they would tell the average manager about conflict management. Write up a brief synopsis of your findings. Compare and contrast your findings with the materials from this chapter and be ready to present them in class.

3. Teamwork. 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 1: A group of students wants a 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 2: The firm 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 3: 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 and your group want to have the facilities, but you are reluctant to have fees increase.Scenario 4: 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.”


197


4. Analyzing Your Organization (Cumulative Project). Observe the negotiations that take place around you at work. Focus on one negotiation that appears typical for your organization. Disguise the names of those involved and write up a case study on the negotiation process you observed. Utilizing the terms and concepts from this chapter, report your assessment of the effectiveness of both negotiators, their negotiating styles, and provide suggestions for improvement of each person’s negotiation skills.

5. Try It in Real Life. 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 non-convenience 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 be submitted as a written report or given as an in-class exercise.

Suggested Assignment

Conflict-Management Style Survey.* Make copies of the survey instrument provided in the next two pages and distribute them to your class. Give the students the following instructions: When you have completed all fifteen items, add your scores into the “column total” spaces provided. 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. 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 concerns 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 add the totals for the first and second columns in the space provided for Score A and add the third and fourth column totals in the space provided for 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.


198


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 settle the dispute.

Call a meeting to talk over the

problem.Offer to help if I

can.Ignore the problem.

Point Total

3 6 1 0 =10Be 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 hostile manner.

Try to persuade person to give up the

hostile behavior.Stay and listen as long as possible. Walk away.

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 hostile manner.

Try to persuade the person to give up the

hostile behavior.Stay and listen as long as possible. Walk away.

3. When I observe people in conflict, where anger, threats, hostility, and strong opinions are present, I tend to:

Become involved and take a position. Attempt to mediate.

Observe to see what happens.

Leave as quickly as possible.

4. When I perceive another person as meeting his or her needs at my expense, I am apt to:

Work to do anything I can to change that

person.

Rely on persuasion and “facts” when

attempting to have that person change

Work hard at changing how I

relate to that person.Accept the situation

as it is.

5. When involved in an interpersonal dispute, I generally:

Draw the other person into seeing

the problem as I do.

Examine the issues between us as

logically as possible.

Look hard for a workable

compromise.

Let time take its course and hope the problem works itself

out.


199


6. The quality that I value the most in dealing with conflict would be:Emotional strength

and security. Intelligence. Love and openness. Patience.

7. Following a serious altercation with someone I care for deeply, I:

Strongly desire to go back and settle things my way.

Want to go back and work it out,

whatever it takes.

Worry about it a lot, but do not

initiate/plan for further contact.

Let it lie and do not plan.

8. When I see a serious conflict developing between two people I care about, I tend to:Express my

disappointment that this had to happen.

Attempt to persuade them to resolve their

differences.Watch to see what

develops. Leave the scene.

9. When I see a serious conflict developing between two people who are unimportant to me, I tend to:

Express my disappointment that

this happened.

Attempt to persuade them to resolve their

differences.Watch to see what

develops. Leave the scene.

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 get my way.

Try to work out differences

cooperatively.

I'm easy-going and take a software

conciliatory position.Usually avoid the

conflict.

11. When communicating with someone with whom I am having a serious conflict, I:Try to overpower the other person with my speech.

Talk a little bit more than I listen.

Am an active listener (feeding back words

and feelings).

Am a passive listener (agreeing and apologizing).

12. When involved in an unpleasant conflict, I:

Use humor with the other party.

Make an occasional quip or joke about

the situation.Relate humor only to

myself.Suppress all

attempts at 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 for each row)

Insist that the Look the person Maintain Avoid looking


200


person look me in the eye.

directly in the eye and maintain eye

contact.intermittent eye

contact.directly at the

person.

Stand close and make physical

contact.

Use my hands and body to illustrate my

point.

Stand close to the person without

touching him or her.Stand back and keep my hands to myself.

Use strong, direct language and tell the

person to stop.Try to persuade the

person to stop

Talk gently and tell the person what my

feelings are. Say and do nothing

Total of Column 1 Total of Column 2 Total of Column 3 Total of Column 4

Column 1 + Column 2 = Score A Column 3 + Column4 = Score B


201

13: conflict and negotiation -...

Documents