robbins organization behaviour 13-chapter 15

Bob StretchSouthwestern College

Robbins & Judge

Organizational Behavior13th Edition

Conflict and NegotiationConflict and Negotiation

15-1© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

Chapter Learning ObjectivesChapter Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:– Define conflict.

– Differentiate between the traditional, human relations, and interactionist views of conflict.

– Outline the conflict process.

– Define negotiation.

– Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.

– Apply the five steps in the negotiation process.

– Show how individual differences influence negotiations.

– Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations.

– Describe cultural differences in negotiations.

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 15-2

Conflict DefinedConflict Defined

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– That point in an ongoing activity when an interaction

“crosses over” to become an interparty conflict

Encompasses 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 ThoughtTransitions in Conflict Thought

Traditional View of Conflict

– The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be avoided

– Prevalent view in the 1930s-1940s

Conflict resulted from:

– Poor communication

– Lack of openness

– Failure to respond to employee needs


Continued Transitions in Conflict ThoughtContinued Transitions in Conflict Thought

Human Relations View of Conflict– The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome in

any group

– Prevalent from the late 1940s through mid-1970s

Interactionist View of Conflict– The belief that conflict is not only a positive force in a group

but that it is absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively

– Current view


Forms of Interactionist ConflictForms of Interactionist Conflict


Types of Interactionist ConflictTypes of Interactionist Conflict

Task Conflict– Conflicts over content and goals of the work

– Low-to-moderate levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL

Relationship Conflict– Conflict based on interpersonal relationships

– Almost always DYSFUNCTIONAL

Process Conflict– Conflict over how work gets done

– Low levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL


The Conflict ProcessThe Conflict Process

We will focus on each step in a moment…


E X H I B I T 15-1E X H I B I T 15-1

Stage I: Potential Opposition or IncompatibilityStage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility

Communication– Semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise”

Structure– Size and specialization of jobs

– Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity

– Member/goal incompatibility

– Leadership styles (close or participative)

– Reward systems (win-lose)

– Dependence/interdependence of groups

Personal Variables– Differing individual value systems

– Personality types


Stage II: Cognition and PersonalizationStage II: Cognition and Personalization

Important stage for two reasons:

1. Conflict is defined • Perceived Conflict

– Awareness by one or more parties of the existence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise

2. Emotions are expressed that have a strong impact on the eventual outcome• Felt Conflict

– Emotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety, tenseness, frustration, or hostility


Stage III: IntentionsStage III: Intentions

Intentions– Decisions to act in a given way– Note: behavior does not always accurate reflect intent

Dimensions of conflict-handling intentions:– Cooperativeness

• Attempting to satisfy the other party’sconcerns

– Assertiveness• Attempting to satisfy

one’s own concerns


E X H I B I T 15-2E X H I B I T 15-2

Source: K. Thomas, “Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations,” in M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., vol. 3 (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992), p. 668. With permission.

Stage IV: BehaviorStage IV: Behavior

Conflict Management

– The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve the desired level of conflict

Conflict-Intensity Continuum


E X H I B I T 15-3E X H I B I T 15-3

Source: Based on S.P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 93–97; and F. Glasi, “The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of Third Parties,” in G.B.J. Bomers and R. Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management and Industrial Relations (Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982), pp. 119–40.

Conflict Resolution TechniquesConflict Resolution Techniques– Problem solving– Superordinate goals– Expansion of resources– Avoidance– Smoothing– Compromise– Authoritative command– Altering the human

variable– Altering the structural

variables– Communication

– Bringing in outsiders– Restructuring the

organization– Appointing a devil’s

advocate


E X H I B I T 15-4E X H I B I T 15-4

Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 59–89

Stage V: OutcomesStage V: Outcomes Functional

– Increased group performance

– Improved quality of decisions

– Stimulation of creativity and innovation

– Encouragement of interest and curiosity

– Provision of a medium for problem-solving

– Creation of an environment for self-evaluation and change

Dysfunctional– Development of discontent

– Reduced group effectiveness

– Retarded communication

– Reduced group cohesiveness

– Infighting among group members overcomes group goals

Creating Functional Conflict– Reward dissent and punish

conflict avoiders


NegotiationNegotiation

Negotiation (Bargaining)– A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or

services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them

Two General Approaches:– Distributive Bargaining

• Negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed amount of resources; a win-lose situation

– Integrative Bargaining• Negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create

a win-win solution


Distributive versus Integrative BargainingDistributive versus Integrative Bargaining

Bargaining Characteristic Distributive Bargaining

Integrative Bargaining

Goal Get all the pie you can Expand the pie

Motivation Win-Lose Win-Win

Focus Positions Interests

Information Sharing Low High

Duration of Relationships Short-Term Long-Term


E X H I B I T 15-5E X H I B I T 15-5

Distributive

Integrative

Source: Based on R. J. Lewicki and J. A. Litterer, Negotiation (Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1985), p. 280.

Bargaining Tactics and the Bargaining ZoneBargaining Tactics and the Bargaining Zone

Distributive Tactics– Make an aggressive

first offer

– Reveal a deadline

Integrative Tactics– Bargain in teams

– Put more issues on the table

– Don’t compromise


E X H I B I T 15-6E X H I B I T 15-6

The Negotiation ProcessThe Negotiation Process

BATNA

– The Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement

– The lowest acceptable value (outcome) to an individual for a negotiated agreement

The “Bottom Line” for negotiations


E X H I B I T 15-7E X H I B I T 15-7

Individual Differences in Negotiation EffectivenessIndividual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness

Personality Traits– Extroverts and agreeable people weaker at distributive

negotiation – disagreeable introvert is best– Intelligence is a weak indicator of effectiveness

Mood and Emotion– Ability to show anger helps in distributive bargaining– Positive moods and emotions help integrative bargaining

Gender– Men and women negotiate the same way, but may

experience different outcomes– Women and men take on gender stereotypes in negotiations:

tender and tough– Women are less likely to negotiate


Third-Party NegotiationsThird-Party Negotiations Four Basic Third-Party Roles

– Mediator• A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using

reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions for alternatives

– Arbitrator• A third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an

agreement.

– Conciliator• A trusted third party who provides an informal communication

link between the negotiator and the opponent

– Consultant• An impartial third party, skilled in conflict management, who

attempts to facilitate creative problem solving through communication and analysis


Global ImplicationsGlobal Implications

Conflict and Culture– Japanese and U.S. managers view conflict differently

– U.S. managers more likely to use competing tactics while Japanese managers are likely to use compromise and avoidance

Cultural Differences in Negotiations– Multiple cross-cultural studies on negotiation styles, for

instance:• American negotiators are more likely than Japanese bargainers

to make a first offer

• North Americans use facts to persuade, Arabs use emotion, and Russians used asserted ideals

• Brazilians say “no” more often than Americans or Japanese


Summary and Managerial ImplicationsSummary and Managerial Implications Conflict can be

constructive or destructive

Reduce excessive conflict by using:– Competition– Collaboration– Avoidance– Accommodation– Compromise

Integrative negotiation is a better long-term method


E X H I B I T 15-8E X H I B I T 15-8

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any

means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the

United States of America.

Copyright ©2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

robbins organization behaviour 13-chapter 15

Documents

conflict process

negotiation conflict

conflict thought

interparty conflict

traditional view of

negotiation process

prevalent view

incompatibility stage