1

INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT!
process that occurs when one person, group, or organizational subunit frustrates the
goal attainment of another.!
often involves antagonistic attitudes and behaviours"
attitudes - groups may dislike each other, see each other as unreasonable,
develop negative stereotypes of each other"
behaviours - might include name calling, sabotage, physical aggression"
conflict can be managed collaboratively and it can be hidden or suppressed"

"

TYPES OF CONFLICT!
RELATIONSHIP CONFLICT"

"

tensions among individuals that have to do with their relationship not the task at hand."
ex. personality clashes"

"

TASK CONFLICT"
disagreements about the nature of the work to be done."
ex. differences of opinion about goals or technical matters"
some conflict can be beneficial, especially if a task is non-routine and requires multiple
perspectives to be considered, as long as it does not degenerate into relationship

"

conflict"

PROCESS CONFLICT"
disagreements about how work should be organized and accomplished"
ex. disagreements about responsibility, authority, resource allocation, and who should

"

do what"

"
"
"

CAUSES OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT!

"

GROUP IDENTIFICATION and INTERGROUP BIAS"

identification with a particular group can set the stage for organizational conflict"
people have a tendency to develop a more positive view of their own in-group and a
less positive view of the out-group of which they are not a member"
people in organizations might identify with groups based on personal characteristics
(race, gender), job function (marketing, production), or job level (manager, nonmanager)"
differences between groups can be amplified by differences in power, opportunity,

"

perks, etc. that come with being part of a particular group"

INTERDEPENDENCE"
potential for conflict exists when individuals or groups are mutually dependent on each
other to accomplish their own goals."
ex. sales dept. needs production dept. to provide them with goods, and production
dept. needs sales to provide regular orders with enough time to ensure production"
2 reasons interdependence can lead to conflict"
parties must interact to coordinate their interests - no conflict if each can
accomplish their goals on their own"
interdependence implies that each party has some power over the other so there
is the possibility a party can abuse their power"
does not necessarily lead to conflict, can also lead to collaboration through mutual

"

assistance!

POWER"
if dependence is not mutual but one-way, potential for conflict increases"
ex. A needs B to accomplish its goals, but B does not need A = B has power over A"
ex. Quality control in a factory - production workers need inspectors to approve their

"

work but inspectors dont need anything from production workers"

3
STATUS"
people expect to follow orders of higher status people (ex. workers follow direction of
manager)"
may be occasions when lower status people have to direct tasks of higher status
people can lead to resentment"
ex. junior staff more adept with information technology than senior staff "
ex. restaurant - lower status servers give orders to higher-status chefs"

"

CULTURE"
when different cultures develop in the same organization, difference in values and
beliefs can lead to conflict"
ex. Hospital - Administrators may value cost-effectiveness while physicians value

"

quality care at any cost "

AMBIGUITY"
uncertainty about goals, performance criteria, or responsibilities can lead to
conflict."
can make it hard to assign praise and blame"
ex. sales drop with new product - marketing may blame design for poor product and
design may blame marketing for poor advertising"
unclear performance criteria common source of conflict between managers and

"

workers."

SCARCE RESOURCES"
differences in power are magnified when resources become scarce"
can lead to struggles for power"
latent conflict can become overt conflict when resources are scarce"
ex. 2 scientists who dont like each other but maintain the peace until lab space is

"
"

reduced"

CONFLICT DYNAMICS!
When conflict begins, the following events often occur: "

"

Winning the conflict becomes more important that developing a good solution to the
problems at hand."
The parties begin to conceal information from each other or to pass on distorted
information."
Each side becomes more cohesive (the groups are more attractive to their members).
Those who speak of conciliation are punished, and strict conformity is expected."
Contact with the opposite party is negatively stereotyped, the image of ones own
position is boosted."
On each side, more aggressive people who are skilled at engaging in conflict may

"

emerge as leaders."
The elements of this process become additional problems to the original cause of the
conflict and can work against the achievement of a peaceful solution."

"
MANAGING CONFLICT!
"

There are several basic reactions that can be thought of as styles, strategies, or
intentions for dealing with conflict. "
No style is inherently superior, each might have its place depending on the situation."
The approaches to managing conflict reflect:"
how assertive you are in trying to satisfy your own or your groups concerns "
how cooperative you are in trying to satisfy the concerns of the other party"
AVOIDING"

"

a conflict management style characterized by low assertiveness of ones own

interests and low cooperation with the other party"
can provide short-term stress reduction but does not change the situation"
useful if the issue is trivial, information is lacking, people need to cool down, or the
opponent is very powerful and hostile."

5
ACCOMMODATING"
cooperating with other party while not asserting ones own interests."
effective when you are wrong, the issue is more important to the other party, or you
want to build good will."
if other party sees it as a sign of weakness can negatively affect future interactions!

"

COMPETING"
maximizes assertiveness for your own position and minimizes cooperation."
conflict is thought of in strict win-lose terms"
useful when you have lots of power, you are sure of your facts, situation is truly win-

"

lose, or you wont have to interact with the other party in the future!

COMPROMISE"
combines intermediate levels of assertiveness and cooperation!
you attempt to satisfy but not maximize your outcomes and hope the same occurs for
the other party"
ex. Law - plea bargain"
determining rules of exchange between the two parties is important in compromise
and thus can lead to procedural conflict"
does not always result in the most creative response to conflict"
not useful in resolving conflicts resulting from power imbalances because weaker
party may have little to offer stronger party"
useful in dealing with conflict stemming from scarce resources!
useful if other strategies fail"

"
"
"
"
"
"
"

6
COLLABORATING"
maximizes both assertiveness and cooperation!
hope is for a win-win solution where both you and the other party get all you want "
collaboration is a problem-solving exercise"
works best when conflict is not intense and when each party has information that is
useful to the other"
takes time and practice to develop"
frequently enhances productivity and achievement!

"

NEGOTIATION"
a decision-making process among interdependent parties who do not share identical

"

preferences"

DISTRIBUTIVE NEGOTIATION"
win-lose negotiation in which a fixed amount of assets is divided between the parties"
in theory, tendency is toward compromise!
single-issue negotiation "
ex. buying a car - price - you want to pay minimum, seller wants to get maximum"
ex. salary negotiation - only so much money to go around!
Tactics:!
Threats - implying you will punish the other party if they dont give-in"
useful when you have power over other party, threat is posed in civil way or you
dont expect future negotiations with the party"
can backfire if power is balanced or threat is crude!
Promises - pledges that giving-in will lead to rewards in the future"
useful when you lack power but anticipate future negotiations with other party!
Firmness - not giving in to other side"
can lead to deadlock!
Concessions - agreeing with some demands of other party"
several small concessions early on in negotiation can lead other side to
reciprocate!

7
Persuasion - trying to convince other party through reason"
2 pronged attack"
assert technical merits of partys position"
assert the fairness of the position"
persuaders most effective when they are perceived as expert, likeable, and

"

unbiased (3rd parties can be brought in to reduce bias)!

INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION"
win-win negotiation that assumes that mutual problem solving can enlarge the
amount of assets to be divided between the parties."
people more often think in terms of distributed negotiation where the amount of assets
are fixed rather than integrative negotiation where the goal is to expand the amount of
assets to be divided"
Tactics:!
Copious Information Exchange!
goal is not to use information to attack other partys position"
goal is for free flow of information to find solutions"
trust needs to be built so people believe each other"
questioning and listening important"
Framing Differences as Opportunities!
ex. group project - because of other responsibilities, one partner wants to finish
the project early while the other wants to finish at the deadline. Solution: one
partner starts the project and one finishes it. Different from compromise
because neither side gives anything up to achieve their goals. "
Cutting Costs!
if you can cut the costs the other party associates with an agreement, your
chance of a settlement increases"
ex. you want a new job task at work, your boss doesnt like the idea because
she wants your skills on your current assignment. Can lessen the cost by

"

training someone under you to take over your tasks."

8
Increasing Resources !
two parties working together may have access to twice as many resources as
one party - using these resources the parties may be able to increase the assets
they are negotiating over!
Superordinate Goals !
attractive outcomes that can be achieved only by collaboration"
these goals are beyond functional objectives that might be in conflict (ex.
finance vs. design)"
ex. keeping a brand name alive in the face of cost cutting - everyone must work

"

together to achieve the overarching goal!

THIRD PARTY INVOLVEMENT"

when parties reach an impasse, a third party may need to intervene"
ex. manager intervening in conflict between two employees"
in some cases, a third party may be involved throughout the negotiations"
ex. real estate agents"
Mediation - a mediator tries to aid the negotiation without having authority to impose
decisions"
may help parties clarify their goals, introduce humour, act as lightening rod for
anger, highlight points of agreement, encourage concessions, propose new
options!
Arbitration - an arbitrator is given the authority to dictate the terms of settlement of a
conflict"
parties can agree to it or it can be mandated by law!
conventional arbitration - arbitrator can choose any outcome !
final offer arbitration - each party makes a final offer and arbitrator chooses

"
"
"
"

between them!

IS ALL CONFLICT BAD?!

"

Conflict can promote organizational change. For organizations to survive, they must
adapt to their environments. This requires changes in strategy that may be stimulated
through conflict."

"

CONFLICT > CHANGE > ADAPTATION > SURVIVAL"

"
"

HOW DOES CONFLICT PROMOTE CHANGE?"

can bring out new ideas as opposing parties try to one up each other "
conflicting parties may monitor each other closer and find problems that signal the
need for change."
can signal that a redistribution of power is necessary"

"
"

CONFLICT STIMULATION"
a strategy of increasing conflict to motivate change."
causes of conflict (ex. scarcity, ambiguity) can be manipulated by managers to
achieve change "
signals this may be a useful strategy"
1. existence of a friendly rut where peaceful relationships take precedence over
organizational goals"
2. when parties that should be interacting closely withdraw from each other to avoid
conflict"
3. when conflict is suppressed or downplayed by denying differences, ignoring

"
"

controversy, and exaggerating points of agreement"