Conflict and Negotiation: Learning Catalytics Questions: Instructor Directions and Follow-Up

Chapter 14 Conflict and Negotiation
Page
Chapter
532
14
Conflict and Negotiation

LEARNING OBJECTIVES)
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Differentiate between the traditional and interactionist views of conflict.

Describe the three types of conflict and the three loci of conflict.
Outline the conflict process.
Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
Apply the five steps of the negotiation process.
Show how individual differences influence negotiations.
Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations.
INSTRUCTORS RESOURCES
Instructors may wish to use the following resources when presenting this chapter.
Learning Catalytics Questions: Instructor Directions and Follow-Up
Organizational
Behavior Concept
Conflict handling
intentions
Conflict
management
techniques
LC Question
Instructor Directions and Follow-Up
Rank order your preferred

method of handling
conflict.
After explaining dimensions of conflict handling

intentions, ask students to think about situations where
they have had conflict. Then have them answer this
question and rank order their preferences.
What is an example of a
Introduce this question after explaining behavior. Refer
conflict management
students to the chart and encourage them to come up
technique that you have
with their own example of a technique. Debrief by
used successfully? Use the reviewing some of the examples.
list in the book or come up
with your own.
Copyright 2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
Page
533
Text Exercises
Myth or Science?: Teams Negotiate Better than Individuals in Collectivistic

Cultures
glOBalization!: Trust Is an Issue
An Ethical Choice: Using Empathy to Negotiate More Ethically
Point/Counterpoint: Pro Sports Strikes Are Caused by Greedy Owners
Questions for Review
Experiential Exercise: A Negotiation Role-Play
Ethical Dilemma: The Lowball Applicant
Text Cases
Case Incident 1: Choosing Your Battles

Case Incident 2: Twinkies, Rubber Rooms, and Collective Bargaining
Instructors Choice
This section presents an exercise that is NOT found in the student's textbook. Instructor's
Choice reinforces the text's emphasis through various activities. Some Instructor's Choice
activities are centered on debates, group exercises, Internet research, and student
experiences. Some can be used in class in their entirety, while others require some
additional work on the student's part. The course instructor may choose to use these at
any time throughout the classsome may be more effective as icebreakers, while some
may be used to pull together various concepts covered in the chapter.
Web Exercises
At the end of each chapter of this Instructors Manual, you will find suggested exercises
and ideas for researching OB topics on the Internet. The exercises Exploring OB Topics
on the Web are set up so that you can simply photocopy the pages, distribute them to
your class, and make assignments accordingly. You may want to assign the exercises as
an out-of-class activity or as lab activities with your class.
Summary and Implications for Managers
A. While many people assume conflict lowers group and organizational
performance, this assumption is frequently incorrect.
B. Conflict can be either constructive or destructive to the functioning of a group or
unit.
C. As shown in Exhibit 14-8, levels of conflict can be either too high or too low to be
constructive. Either extreme hinders performance.
D. 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. Specific implications for managers are
below:
Page
534
1. As Exhibit 14-8 suggests, choose an authoritarian management style in

emergencies, when unpopular actions need to be implemented (such as cost
cutting, enforcement of unpopular rules, discipline), and when the issue is
vital to the organizations welfare. Be certain to communicate your logic when
possible to make certain employees remain engaged and productive.
2. Seek integrative solutions when your objective is to learn, when you want to
merge insights from people with different perspectives, when you need to gain
commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus, and when you need
to work through feelings that have interfered with a relationship.
3. It is best to avoid an issue when it is trivial or symptomatic of other issues,
when more important issues are pressing, when you perceive no chance of
satisfying everyones concerns, when people need to cool down and regain
perspective, when gathering information, and when others can resolve the
conflict more effectively.
4. You can build trust by accommodating others when you find youre wrong,
when you need to demonstrate reasonableness, when other positions need to
be heard, when issues are more important to others than to yourself, when you
want to satisfy others and maintain cooperation, when you can build social
credits for later issues, to minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing,
and when employees should learn from their own mistakes.
5. Consider compromising when goals are important but not worth potential
disruption, when opponents with equal power are committed to mutually
exclusive goals, and when you need temporary settlements to complex issues.
6. Distributive bargaining can resolve disputes, but it often reduces the
satisfaction of one or more negotiators because it is confrontational and
focused on the short term. Integrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to provide
outcomes that satisfy all parties and build lasting relationships.
7. Make sure you set aggressive negotiating goals and try to find creative ways
to achieve the objectives of both parties, especially when you value the longterm relationship with the other party. That doesnt mean sacrificing your selfinterest; rather, it means trying to find creative solutions that give both parties
what they really want.
This chapter begins with a discussion of the corporate culture at banking giant JP Morgan Chase. The
company is the largest U.S. bank and boasts a decade-long record of never reporting a quarterly loss.
However, despite its seeming success, the bank may be hiding a contentious corporate culture one in
which conflicts are avoided at all costs and divergent ways of thinking are discouraged.
BRIEF CHAPTER OUTLINE

I. A Definition of Conflict
A. There has been no shortage of definitions of conflict, but common to most is the
idea that conflict is a perception.
1. If no one is aware of a conflict, then it is generally agreed no conflict exists.
a. Also needed to begin the conflict process are opposition or incompatibility
and interaction.
Page
535
2. We define conflict as 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.
B. The Traditional View of Conflict
1. The early approach to conflict assumed all conflict was bad and to be avoided.
2. It was viewed negatively and discussed with such terms as violence,
destruction, and irrationality to reinforce its negative connotation.
3. This traditional view of conflict was consistent with attitudes about group
behavior that prevailed in the 1930s and 1940s.
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. But, not all conflicts are good.
a. Functional conflict supports the goals of the group and improves its
performance.
b. Conflicts that hinder group performance are dysfunctional or destructive
forms of conflict.
II. Types and Loci of Conflict
A. Types of Conflict
1. Researchers have classified conflicts into three categories: task, relationship,
or process.
a. Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work.
b. Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships.
c. Process conflict is about how the work gets done.
2. Studies demonstrate that relationship conflicts, at least in work settings, are
almost always dysfunctional.
a. Why? It appears that the friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent in
relationship conflicts increase personality clashes and decrease mutual
understanding, which hinders the completion of organizational tasks.
3. Of the three types, relationship conflicts also appear to be the most
psychologically exhausting to individuals.
4. While scholars agree that relationship conflict is dysfunctional, there is
considerably less agreement as to whether task and process conflicts are
functional.
a. Early research suggested that task conflict within groups was associated
with higher group performance, but a recent review of 116 studies found
that task conflict was essentially unrelated to group performance.
b. However, there were factors that could create a relationship between
conflict and performance.
c. One such factor was whether the conflict included top management or
occurred lower in the organization.
d. Task conflict among top management teams was positively associated
with their performance, whereas conflict lower in the organization was
negatively associated with group performance.
Page
536
e. This review also found that it mattered whether other types of conflict
were occurring at the same time.
f. If task and relationship conflict occurred together, task conflict was more
likely negative, whereas if task conflict occurred by itself, it more likely
was positive.
5. Finally, some scholars have argued that the strength of conflict is important
if task conflict is very low, people arent really engaged or addressing the
important issues.
a. If task conflict is too high, however, infighting will quickly degenerate
into personality conflict.
b. According to this view, moderate levels of task conflict are optimal.
i. Supporting this argument, one study in China found that moderate
levels of task conflict in the early development stage increased
creativity in groups, but high levels decreased team performance.
6. Finally, the personalities of the teams appear to matter.
a. A recent study demonstrated that teams made up of individuals who are,
on average, high in openness and emotional stability are better able to turn
task conflict into increased group performance.
b. The reason may be that open and emotionally stable teams can put task
conflict in perspective and focus on how the variance in ideas can help
solve the problem, rather than letting it degenerate into relationship
conflicts.
7. What about process conflict? Researchers found that process conflicts revolve
around delegation and roles. Conflicts over delegation often revolve around
shirking, and conflicts over roles can leave some group members feeling
marginalized.
8. Thus, process conflicts often become highly personalized and quickly devolve
into relationship conflicts.
a. Its also true, of course, that arguing about how to do something takes time
away from actually doing it. Were all been part of groups in which the
arguments and debates about roles and responsibilities seem to go
nowhere.
B. Loci of Conflict
1. Another way to understand conflict is to consider its locus, or where the
conflict occurs.
2. Here, too, there are three basic types.
a. Dyadic conflict is conflict between two people.
b. Intragroup conflict occurs within a group or team.
c. Intergroup conflict is conflict between groups or teams.
3. Nearly all the literature on task, relationship, and process conflict considers
intragroup conflict (within the group).
4. That makes sense given that groups and teams often exist only to perform a
particular task. However, it doesnt necessarily tell us about the other loci of
conflict.
5. Another intriguing question about loci is whether conflicts interact or buffer
one another.
Page
537
a. Intense intergroup conflict can be quite stressful to group members and

might well affect the way they interact.
6. Thus, understanding functional and dysfunctional conflict requires not only
that we identify the type of conflict; we also need to know where it occurs.
7. Its possible that while the concepts of task, relationship, and process conflict
are useful in understanding intragroup or even dyadic conflict, they are less
useful in explaining the effects of intergroup conflict.
8. In sum, the traditional view that all conflict should be eliminated is shortsighted.
a. The interactionist view that conflict can stimulate active discussion
without spilling over into negative, disruptive emotions is incomplete.
b. Thinking about conflict in terms of type and locus helps us realize that it is
probably inevitable in most organizations, and when it does occur, we can
attempt to make it as productive as possible.
III. The Conflict Process
A. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility (Exhibit 14-1)
1. Communication
a. Communication as a source of conflict represents those opposing forces
that arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and noise in the
communication channels.
b. Differing word connotations, jargon, insufficient exchange of information,
and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to communication
and potential antecedents to conflict.
c. The potential for conflict increases when either too little or too much
communication takes place.
d. Communication is functional up to a point, after which it is possible to
over communicate, increasing the potential for conflict.
2. Structure
a. The term structure includes variables such as size, degree of
specialization, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibility,
leadership styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence.
b. Size and specialization act as forces to stimulate conflict.
c. The greater the ambiguity in responsibility for actions lies, the greater the
potential for conflict.
d. The diversity of goals among groups is a major source of conflict.
e. When groups within an organization seek diverse ends, some of which are
inherently at odds, opportunities for conflict increase.
f. Reward systems, too, create conflict when one members gain is at
anothers expense.
g. Finally, if a group is dependent on another group, opposing forces are
stimulated.
3. Personal variablesinclude personality, emotions, and values.
a. People high in the personality traits of disagreeableness, neuroticism, or
self-monitoring are prone to tangle with other people more often, and to
react poorly when conflicts occur.
Page
538
b. Emotions can also cause conflict even when they are not directed at
others.
B. Stage II: Cognition and Personalization
1. Antecedent conditions lead to conflict only when the parties are affected by
and aware of it.
2. However, because a disagreement is a perceived conflict does not mean it is
personalized.
3. Conflict is personalized when it is felt and when individuals become
emotionally involved.
4. This stage is where conflict issues tend to be defined and this definition
delineates the possible settlements.
5. Second, emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions.
6. Negative emotions produce oversimplification of issues, reductions in trust,
and negative interpretations of the other partys behavior.
7. Positive feelings increase the tendency to see potential relationships among
the elements of a problem, to take a broader view of the situation, and to
develop more innovative solutions.
C. Stage III: Intentions
1. Intentions are decisions to act in a given way.
a. Why are intentions separated out as a distinct stage? Merely one party
attributing the wrong intentions to the other escalates a lot of conflicts.
b. One authors effort to identify the primary conflict-handling intentions is
represented in Exhibit 142.
c. Five conflict-handling intentions can be identified: competing,
collaborating, avoiding, accommodating, and compromising.
2. Intentions are not always fixed.
a. They might change because of reconceptualization or because of an
emotional reaction.
b. However, individuals have preferences among the five conflict-handling
intentions.
c. We can predict a persons intentions rather well from a combination of
intellectual and personality characteristics.
D. Stage IV: Behavior (Exhibit 14-3)
1. Stage IV is where conflicts become visible. The behavior stage includes the
statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties. These
conflict behaviors are usually overt attempts to implement each partys
intentions.
2. At the lower part of the continuum, conflicts are characterized by subtle,
indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension.
3. Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum until
they become highly destructive.
4. If a conflict is dysfunctional, what can the parties do to de-escalate it? Or,
conversely, what options exist if conflict is too low and needs to be increased?
a. This brings us to techniques of conflict management.
b. Exhibit 14-4 lists the major resolution and stimulation techniques that
allow managers to control conflict levels.
Page
539
c. We have already described several as conflict-handling intentions.

d. Under ideal conditions, a persons intentions should translate into
comparable behaviors.
E. Stage V: Outcomes
1. Outcomes may be functionalimproving group performance, or
dysfunctional in hindering it. (Exhibit 14-1)
2. Functional outcomes
a. Conflict is constructive when it:
i. Improves the quality of decisions.
ii. Stimulates creativity and innovation.
iii. Encourages interest and curiosity.
iv. Provides the medium through which problems can be aired and
tensions released.
v. Fosters an environment of self-evaluation and change.
b. The evidence suggests that conflict can improve the quality of decision
making.
c. Research studies in diverse settings confirm the functionality of
discussion.
d. These observations lead us to predict benefits to organizations from the
increasing cultural diversity of the workforce.
3. Dysfunctional outcomes
a. The destructive consequences of conflict on the performance of a group or
an organization are generally well known.
b. A substantial body of literature documents how dysfunctional conflicts
can reduce group effectiveness.
4. 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. Groups that resolve conflicts successfully discuss differences of
opinion openly and are prepared to manage conflict when it arises.
c. Differences across countries in conflict resolution strategies may be based
on collectivistic tendencies and motives.
IV. Negotiation
A. Introduction
1. Negotiation is a process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree upon the exchange rate for them. We use the
terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
2. Although we commonly think of the outcomes of negotiation in one-shot
economic terms, every negotiation in organizations also affects the
relationship between the negotiators and the way the negotiators feel about
themselves.
3. 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 achieving an immediate outcome of bargaining.
4. Note that we use the terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
Page
540
B. Bargaining Strategies
1. Two general approaches to negotiation: (Exhibit 14-5)
a. Distributive bargaining
b. Integrative bargaining
2. Distributive bargaining
a. The essence of distributive bargaining is negotiating over who gets what
share of a fixed pie. (Exhibit 14-6)
i. By fixed pie, we mean a set amount of goods or services to be divvied
up.
ii. When the pie is fixed, or the parties believe it is, they tend to bargain
distributively.
b. The most widely cited example of distributive bargaining is in labormanagement negotiations over wages.
i. The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 146.
(a) Parties A and B represent two negotiators.
(b) Each has a target point that defines what he or she would like to
achieve.
(c) Each also has a resistance point, which marks the lowest outcome
that is acceptable.
(d) The area between these two points makes up each ones aspiration
range.
(e) As long as there is some overlap between A and Bs aspiration
ranges, there exists a settlement range where each ones aspirations
can be met.
c. When engaged in distributive bargaining, one of the best things you can
do is make the first offer, and make it an aggressive one.
d. Another distributive bargaining tactic is revealing a deadline.
3. Integrative bargaining
a. In contrast to distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining operates
under the assumption that one or more of the possible settlements can
create a winwin solution.
b. Both parties must be engaged for it to work.
c. In terms of intra-organizational behavior, all things being equal,
integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining.
d. Why do we not see more integrative bargaining in organizations? The
answer lies in the conditions necessary for this type of negotiation to
succeed.
e. There are ways to achieve more integrative outcomes.
i. Individuals who bargain in teams reach more integrative agreements
than those who bargain individually because more ideas are generated
when more people are at the bargaining table. So, try bargaining in
teams.
ii. Another way to achieve higher joint-gain settlements is to put more
issues on the table.
iii. Focus also on the underlying interests of both sides rather than on
issues.
Page
541
iv. Negotiations that occur when both parties are focused on learning and
understanding the other side tend to also yield higher joint outcomes
than those in which parties are more interested in their individual
bottom-line outcomes.
4. Compromise might be your worst enemy in negotiating a win-win agreement.
i. The reason is that compromising reduces the pressure to bargain
integratively.
ii. After all, if you or your opponent caves in easily, it doesnt require
anyone to be creative to reach a settlement. Thus, people end up
settling for less than they could have obtained if they had been forced
to consider the other partys interests, trade off issues, and be creative.
C. The Negotiation Process (Exhibit 14-7)
1. Preparation and planning
a. Do your homework.
i. What is the nature of the conflict?
ii. What is the history leading up to this negotiation?
iii. Who is involved, and what are their perceptions of the conflict?
iv. What do you want from the negotiation?
v. What are your goals?
b. You also want assess what you think are the other partys goals.
c. When you can anticipate your opponents position, you are better
equipped to counter his or her arguments with the facts and figures that
support your position.
d. Relationships will change as a result of a negotiation, so thats another
outcome to take into consideration.
e. Once you have gathered your information, use it to develop a strategy.
i. Determine your and the other sides Best Alternative to a Negotiated
Agreement (BATNA).
ii. Your BATNA determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a
negotiated agreement.
iii. Any offer you receive that is higher than your BATNA is better than
an impasse.
2. Definition of ground rules
a. Who will do the negotiating? Where will it take place? What time
constraints, if any, will apply?
b. To what issues will negotiation be limited? Will there be a specific
procedure to follow if an impasse is reached?
c. During this phase, the parties will also exchange their initial proposals or
demands.
3. Clarification and justification
a. When initial positions have been exchanged, explain, amplify, clarify,
bolster, and justify your original demands.
b. This need not be confrontational.
c. You might want to provide the other party with any documentation that
helps support your position.
Page
542
4. Bargaining and problem solving

a. The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give-and-take in trying
to hash out an agreement.
b. Concessions will undoubtedly need to be made by both parties.
5. Closure and implementation
a. The final stepformalizing the agreement that has been worked out and
developing any procedures that are necessary for implementation and
monitoring.
b. Major negotiations will require hammering out the specifics in a formal
contract.
c. For most cases, however, closure of the negotiation process is nothing
more formal than a handshake.
D. Individual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness
1. Personality traits in negotiation
a. Can you predict an opponents negotiating tactics if you know something
about his/her personality? The evidence says sort of.
b. The evidence suggests that overall agreeableness is weakly related to
negotiation outcomes. Why is this the case?
i. It appears that the degree to which agreeableness, and personality
more generally, affects negotiation outcomes depends on the situation.
ii. The importance of being extraverted in negotiations, for example, will
very much depend on how the other party reacts to someone who is
assertive and enthusiastic.
iii. A recent study suggested that the type of negotiations matter as well.
In this study, agreeable individuals reacted more positively and felt
less stress (measured by their cortisol levels) in integrative
negotiations than in distributive ones.
(a) Low levels of stress, in turn, made for more effective negotiation
outcomes.
iv. Research also suggests intelligence predicts negotiation effectiveness,
but, as with personality, the effects arent especially strong.
2. Moods/emotions in negotiation
a. Moods and emotions influence negotiation, but the way they do depends
on the type of negotiation.
b. Anxiety also appears to have an impact on negotiation.
c. One study found that anxious negotiators expect lower outcomes from
negotiations, respond to offers more quickly, and exit the bargaining
process more quickly, which leads them to obtain worse outcomes.
d. All these findings regarding emotions have related to distributive bargains.
In integrative negotiations, in contrast, positive moods and emotions
appear to lead to more integrative agreements (higher levels of joint gain).
3. Culture in negotiations
a. Do people from different cultures negotiate differently? The simple
answer is the obvious one: yes, they do.
b. First, it appears that people generally negotiate more effectively within
cultures than between them.
Page
543
i. For example, a Colombian is apt to do better negotiating with a

Colombian than with a Sri Lankan.
c. Second, it appears that in cross-cultural negotiations, it is especially
important that the negotiators be high in openness.
d. Finally, because emotions are culturally sensitive, negotiators need to be
especially aware of the emotional dynamics in cross-cultural negotiation.
4. Gender differences in negotiations
a. Men and women negotiate differently and these differences affect
outcomes.
b. A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative, pleasant, and
relationship-oriented in negotiations than are men. There is some merit to
this.
c. Men tend to place a higher value on status, power, and recognition,
whereas women tend to place a higher value on compassion and altruism.
d. Moreover, women do tend to value relationship outcomes more than men,
and men tend to value economic outcomes more than women.
e. These differences affect both negotiation behavior and negotiation
outcomes.
i. Compared to men, women tend to behave in a less assertive, less selfinterested, and more accommodating manner.
ii. However, the disparity goes even further than that. Because of the way
women approach negotiation, other negotiators seek to exploit female
negotiators by, for example, making lower salary offers.
f. So what can be done to change this troublesome state of affairs?
i. First, organizational culture plays a role here.
ii. If an organization, even unwittingly, encourages a predominantly
competitive model for negotiators, this will tend to increase genderstereotypic behaviors (men negotiating competitively, women
negotiating cooperatively), and it will also increase backlash when
women go against stereotype.
iii. Second, at an individual level, women cannot directly control male
stereotypes of women. Fortunately, such stereotypes are fading.
However, women can control their own negotiating behavior.
V. Third-Party Negotiations
A. When individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate and are unable to
resolve their differences through direct negotiations, they may turn to a third
party.
B. A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using
reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the like.
C. An arbitrator is a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.
D. A conciliator is a trusted third party who provides an informal communication
link among parties.
VI. Summary and Implications for Managers
Page
544

unit.
below:
Page
545
EXPANDED CHAPTER OUTLINE

I. A Definition of Conflict
A. There has been no shortage of definitions of conflict, but common to most is the
idea that conflict is a perception.
1. If no one is aware of a conflict, then it is generally agreed no conflict exists.
a. Also needed to begin the conflict process are opposition or incompatibility
and interaction.
B. We define conflict as 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.
1. This describes that point when an interaction crosses over to become an
inter-party conflict.
2. It encompasses the wide range of conflicts that people experience in
organizations.
C. The Traditional View of Conflict
1. The early approach to conflict assumed all conflict was bad and to be avoided.
2. It was viewed negatively and discussed with such terms as violence,
destruction, and irrationality to reinforce its negative connotation.
3. This traditional view of conflict was consistent with attitudes about group
behavior that prevailed in the 1930s and 1940s.
4. Conflict was 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.
5. The view that all conflict is bad certainly offers a simple approach to looking
at the behavior of people who create conflict.
6. We need merely direct our attention to the causes of conflict and correct those
malfunctions to improve group and organizational performance.
7. This view of conflict fell out of favor for a long time as researchers came to
realize that some level of conflict was inevitable.
D. 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. But, not all conflicts are good.
a. Functional conflict supports the goals of the group and improves its
performance.
b. Conflicts that hinder group performance are dysfunctional or destructive
forms of conflict.
II. Types and Loci of Conflict
A. Types of Conflict
1. Researchers have classified conflicts into three categories: task, relationship,
or process.
a. Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work.
b. Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships.
c. Process conflict is about how the work gets done.
Page
546
2. Studies demonstrate that relationship conflicts, at least in work settings, are

almost always dysfunctional.
a. Why? It appears that the friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent in
relationship conflicts increase personality clashes and decrease mutual
understanding, which hinders the completion of organizational tasks.
3. Of the three types, relationship conflicts also appear to be the most
psychologically exhausting to individuals.
4. While scholars agree that relationship conflict is dysfunctional, there is
considerably less agreement as to whether task and process conflicts are
functional.
a. Early research suggested that task conflict within groups was associated
with higher group performance, but a recent review of 116 studies found
that task conflict was essentially unrelated to group performance.
b. However, there were factors that could create a relationship between
conflict and performance.
c. One such factor was whether the conflict included top management or
occurred lower in the organization.
d. Task conflict among top management teams was positively associated
with their performance, whereas conflict lower in the organization was
negatively associated with group performance.
e. This review also found that it mattered whether other types of conflict
were occurring at the same time.
f. If task and relationship conflict occurred together, task conflict was more
likely negative, whereas if task conflict occurred by itself, it more likely
was positive.
5. Finally, some scholars have argued that the strength of conflict is important
if task conflict is very low, people arent really engaged or addressing the
important issues.
a. If task conflict is too high, however, infighting will quickly degenerate
into personality conflict.
b. According to this view, moderate levels of task conflict are optimal.
i. Supporting this argument, one study in China found that moderate
levels of task conflict in the early development stage increased
creativity in groups, but high levels decreased team performance.
6. Finally, the personalities of the teams appear to matter.
a. A recent study demonstrated that teams made up of individuals who are,
on average, high in openness and emotional stability are better able to turn
task conflict into increased group performance.
b. The reason may be that open and emotionally stable teams can put task
conflict in perspective and focus on how the variance in ideas can help
solve the problem, rather than letting it degenerate into relationship
conflicts.
7. What about process conflict? Researchers found that process conflicts revolve
around delegation and roles. Conflicts over delegation often revolve around
shirking, and conflicts over roles can leave some group members feeling
marginalized.
Page
547
8. Thus, process conflicts often become highly personalized and quickly devolve
into relationship conflicts.
a. Its also true, of course, that arguing about how to do something takes time
away from actually doing it. Were all been part of groups in which the
arguments and debates about roles and responsibilities seem to go
nowhere.
B. Loci of Conflict
1. Another way to understand conflict is to consider its locus, or where the
conflict occurs.
2. Here, too, there are three basic types:
a. Dyadic conflict is conflict between two people.
b. Intragroup conflict occurs within a group or team.
c. Intergroup conflict is conflict between groups or teams.
3. Nearly all the literature on task, relationship, and process conflict considers
intragroup conflict (within the group).
4. That makes sense given that groups and teams often exist only to perform a
particular task. However, it doesnt necessarily tell us about the other loci of
conflict.
5. Another intriguing question about loci is whether conflicts interact or buffer
one another.
a. Intense intergroup conflict can be quite stressful to group members and
might well affect the way they interact.
6. Thus, understanding functional and dysfunctional conflict requires not only
that we identify the type of conflict; we also need to know where it occurs.
7. Its possible that while the concepts of task, relationship, and process conflict
are useful in understanding intragroup or even dyadic conflict, they are less
useful in explaining the effects of intergroup conflict.
8. In sum, the traditional view that all conflict should be eliminated is shortsighted.
a. The interactionist view that conflict can stimulate active discussion
without spilling over into negative, disruptive emotions is incomplete.
b. Thinking about conflict in terms of type and locus helps us realize that it is
probably inevitable in most organizations, and when it does occur, we can
attempt to make it as productive as possible.
III. The Conflict Process
A. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility (Exhibit 14-1)
1. Communication
a. Communication as a source of conflict represents those opposing forces
that arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and noise in the
communication channels.
b. Differing word connotations, jargon, insufficient exchange of information,
and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to communication
and potential antecedents to conflict.
c. The potential for conflict increases when either too little or too much
communication takes place.
Page
548
d. Communication is functional up to a point, after which it is possible to

over communicate, increasing the potential for conflict.
2. Structure
a. The term structure includes variables such as size, degree of
specialization, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibility,
leadership styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence.
b. Size and specialization act as forces to stimulate conflict.
i. The larger the group and more specialized its activities, the greater the
likelihood of conflict.
ii. The potential for conflict is greatest where group members are younger
and turnover is high.
c. The greater the ambiguity in responsibility for actions lies, the greater the
potential for conflict.
d. The diversity of goals among groups is a major source of conflict.
e. When groups within an organization seek diverse ends, some of which are
inherently at odds, opportunities for conflict increase.
f. Reward systems, too, create conflict when one members gain is at
anothers expense.
g. Finally, if a group is dependent on another group, opposing forces are
stimulated.
3. Personal variablesinclude personality, emotions, and values.
a. People high in the personality traits of disagreeableness, neuroticism, or
self-monitoring are prone to tangle with other people more often, and to
react poorly when conflicts occur.
b. Emotions can also cause conflict even when they are not directed at
others.
B. Stage II: Cognition and Personalization
1. Antecedent conditions lead to conflict only when the parties are affected by
and aware of it.
2. However, because a disagreement is a perceived conflict does not mean it is
personalized.
3. Conflict is personalized when it is felt and when individuals become
emotionally involved.
4. This stage is where conflict issues tend to be defined and this definition
delineates the possible settlements.
5. Second, emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions.
6. Negative emotions produce oversimplification of issues, reductions in trust,
and negative interpretations of the other partys behavior.
7. Positive feelings increase the tendency to see potential relationships among
the elements of a problem, to take a broader view of the situation, and to
develop more innovative solutions.
C. Stage III: Intentions
1. Intentions are decisions to act in a given way.
a. Why are intentions separated out as a distinct stage? Merely one party
attributing the wrong intentions to the other escalates a lot of conflicts.
Page
549
b. One authors effort to identify the primary conflict-handling intentions,

represented in Exhibit 142, is along two dimensions:
i. Cooperativenessthe degree to which one party attempts to satisfy
the other partys concerns.
ii. Assertivenessthe degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his
or her own concerns.
2. Five conflict-handling intentions can be identified: competing, collaborating,
avoiding, accommodating, and compromising.
a. Competing
i. When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests, regardless
of the impact on the other parties to the conflict.
b. Collaborating
i. When the parties to conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of
all parties. The intention is to solve the problem by clarifying
differences rather than by accommodating.
c. Avoiding
i. A person may recognize that a conflict exists and want to withdraw
from it or suppress it.
d. Accommodating
i. When one party seeks to appease an opponent, that party is willing to
be self-sacrificing.
e. Compromising
i. When each party to the conflict seeks to give up something, sharing
occurs, resulting in a compromised outcome. There is no clear winner
or loser, and the solution provides incomplete satisfaction of both
parties concerns.
3. Intentions are not always fixed.
a. They might change because of reconceptualization or because of an
emotional reaction.
b. However, individuals have preferences among the five conflict-handling
intentions.
c. We can predict a persons intentions rather well from a combination of
intellectual and personality characteristics.
D. Stage IV: Behavior (Exhibit 14-3)
1. Stage IV is where conflicts become visible. The behavior stage includes the
statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties. These
conflict behaviors are usually overt attempts to implement each partys
intentions.
2. Stage IV is a dynamic process of interaction; conflicts exist somewhere along
a continuum.
3. At the lower part of the continuum, conflicts are characterized by subtle,
indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension.
4. Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum until
they become highly destructive.
5. If a conflict is dysfunctional, what can the parties do to de-escalate it? Or,
conversely, what options exist if conflict is too low and needs to be increased?
Page
550
a. This brings us to techniques of conflict management.

b. Exhibit 14-4 lists the major resolution and stimulation techniques that
allow managers to control conflict levels.
c. We have already described several as conflict-handling intentions.
d. Under ideal conditions, a persons intentions should translate into
comparable behaviors.
E. Stage V: Outcomes
1. Outcomes may be functionalimproving group performance, or
dysfunctional in hindering it. (Exhibit 14-1)
2. Functional outcomes
a. How might conflict act as a force to increase group performance?
i. Conflict is constructive when it:
(a) Improves the quality of decisions.
(b) Stimulates creativity and innovation.
(c) Encourages interest and curiosity.
(d) Provides the medium through which problems can be aired and
tensions released.
(e) Fosters an environment of self-evaluation and change.
b. The evidence suggests that conflict can improve the quality of decision
making.
i. Conflict is an antidote for groupthink.
ii. Conflict challenges the status quo, furthers the creation of new ideas,
promotes reassessment of group goals and activities, and increases the
probability that the group will respond to change.
c. Research studies in diverse settings confirm the functionality of
discussion.
i. Team members with greater differences in work styles and experience
also tend to share more information with one another.
d. These observations lead us to predict benefits to organizations from the
increasing cultural diversity of the workforce.
i. And thats what the evidence indicates, under most conditions.
ii. Heterogeneity among group and organization members can increase
creativity, improve the quality of decisions, and facilitate change by
enhancing member flexibility.
iii. Researchers compared decision making groups composed of allCaucasian individuals with groups that also contained members from
Asian, Hispanic, and Black ethnic groups.
iv. The ethnically diverse groups produced more effective and more
feasible ideas, and the unique ideas they generated tended to be of
higher quality than the unique ideas produced by the all-Caucasian
group.
3. Dysfunctional outcomes
a. The destructive consequences of conflict on the performance of a group or
an organization are generally well known.
i. Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve
common ties and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.
Page
551
b. A substantial body of literature documents how dysfunctional conflicts

can reduce group effectiveness.
i. Among the more undesirable consequences are hampered
communication, reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination
of group goals to the primacy of infighting among members.
ii. All forms of conflicteven the functional varietiesappear to reduce
group member satisfaction and reduce trust.
iii. When active discussions turn into open conflicts between members,
information sharing between members has been shown to decrease
significantly.
iv. At the extreme, conflict can bring group functioning to a halt and
threaten the groups survival.
v. We noted that diversity can usually improve group performance and
decision making.
(a) However, if differences of opinion open up along demographic
fault lines, harmful conflicts result and information sharing
decreases.
(b) For example, if differences of opinion in a gender-diverse team
line up so that men all hold one opinion and women hold another,
group members tend to stop listening to one another.
(c) They fall into in-group favoritism and wont take the other sides
point of view into consideration.
(d) Managers in this situation need to pay special attention to these
fault lines and emphasize the shared goals of the team.
4. 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?
i. One of the keys to minimizing counterproductive conflicts is
recognizing when there really is a disagreement.
ii. Many apparent conflicts are due to people using different language to
discuss the same general course of action.
(a) For example, someone in marketing might focus on "distribution
problems, while someone from operations will talk about supply
chain management to describe essentially the same issue.
iii. Successful conflict management recognizes these different approaches
and attempts to resolve them by encouraging open, frank discussion
focused on interests rather than issues (well have more to say about
this when we contrast distributive and integrative bargaining styles).
iv. Another approach is to have opposing groups pick parts of the solution
that are most important to them and then focus on how each side can
get its top needs satisfied.
v. Neither side may get exactly what it wants, but both sides will get the
most important parts of its agenda.
b. Groups that resolve conflicts successfully discuss differences of
opinion openly and are prepared to manage conflict when it arises.
Page
552
i. The most disruptive conflicts are those that are never addressed
directly. 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.
ii. Managers need to emphasize shared interests in resolving conflicts, so
groups that disagree with one another dont become too entrenched in
their points of view and start to take the conflicts personally.
iii. 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.
c. Differences across countries in conflict resolution strategies may be based
on collectivistic tendencies and motives.
i. Collectivist cultures see people as deeply embedded in social
situations, whereas individualist cultures see them as autonomous.
ii. As a result, collectivists are more likely to seek to preserve
relationships and promote the good of the group as a whole.
iii. They will avoid direct expression of conflicts, preferring indirect
methods for resolving differences of opinion.
iv. 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.
v. Some research does support this theory. 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.
vi. 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.
vii. Interview data, however, suggests top management teams in Chinese
high-technology firms prefer collaboration even more than
compromising and avoiding.
IV. Negotiation
A. Introduction
1. Negotiation is a process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree upon the exchange rate for them. We use the
terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
2. Although we commonly think of the outcomes of negotiation in one-shot
economic terms, every negotiation in organizations also affects the
relationship between the negotiators and the way the negotiators feel about
themselves.
3. 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 achieving an immediate outcome of bargaining.
4. Note that we use the terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
Page
553
B. Bargaining Strategies
1. Two general approaches to negotiation: (Exhibit 14-5)
a. Distributive bargaining
b. Integrative bargaining
2. Distributive bargaining
a. An example of distributive bargaining is buying a car.
i. You go out to see the car. It is great and you want it.
ii. The owner tells you the asking price. You do not want to pay that
much.
iii. The two of you then negotiate over the price.
iv. Its most identifying feature is that it operates under zero-sum
conditions.
b. The essence of distributive bargaining is negotiating over who gets what
share of a fixed pie. (Exhibit 14-6)
i. By fixed pie, we mean a set amount of goods or services to be divvied
up.
ii. When the pie is fixed, or the parties believe it is, they tend to bargain
distributively.
c. The most widely cited example of distributive bargaining is in labormanagement negotiations over wages.
i. The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 146.
(a) Parties A and B represent two negotiators.
(b) Each has a target point that defines what he or she would like to
achieve.
(c) Each also has a resistance point, which marks the lowest outcome
that is acceptable.
(d) The area between these two points makes up each ones aspiration
range.
(e) As long as there is some overlap between A and Bs aspiration
ranges, there exists a settlement range where each ones aspirations
can be met.
d. When engaged in distributive bargaining, one of the best things you can
do is make the first offer, and make it an aggressive one.
i. 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.
ii. Another reason, the anchoring bias, was mentioned in Chapter 6.
People tend to fixate on initial information.
iii. 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.
e. Another distributive bargaining tactic is revealing a deadline.
i. Negotiators who reveal deadlines speed concessions from their
negotiating counterparts, making them reconsider their position.
ii. And although negotiators dont think this tactic works, in reality,
negotiators who reveal deadlines do better.
Page
554
3. Integrative bargaining
a. In contrast to distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining operates
under the assumption that one or more of the possible settlements can
create a win-win solution.
b. Both parties must be engaged for it to work.
c. In terms of intra-organizational behavior, all things being equal,
integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining.
i. Because integrative bargaining builds long-term relationships and
facilitates working together in the future, it bonds negotiators and
allows each to leave the bargaining table feeling victorious.
ii. Distributive bargaining, on the other hand, leaves one party a loser. It
tends to build animosities and deepens divisions.
d. Why do we not see more integrative bargaining in organizations? The
answer lies in the conditions necessary for this type of negotiation to
succeed.
i. Parties who are open with information and candid about their
concerns.
ii. Sensitivity by both parties to the others needs.
iii. The ability to trust one another.
iv. A willingness by both parties to maintain flexibility.
e. There are ways to achieve more integrative outcomes.
i. Individuals who bargain in teams reach more integrative agreements
than those who bargain individually because more ideas are generated
when more people are at the bargaining table. So, try bargaining in
teams.
ii. Another way to achieve higher joint-gain settlements is to put more
issues on the table.
(a) The more negotiable issues introduced into a negotiation, the more
opportunity for logrolling, where issues are traded off because
people have different preferences.
(b) This creates better outcomes for each side than if they negotiated
each issue individually.
iii. Focus also on the underlying interests of both sides rather than on
issues.
(a) In other words, it is better to concentrate on why an employee
wants a raise rather than focusing just on the raise amountsome
unseen potential for integrative outcomes may arise if both sides
concentrate on what they really want rather than on the specific
items theyre bargaining over.
(b) Typically, its easier to concentrate on underlying interests when
parties to a negotiation are focused on broad, overall goals rather
than on immediate outcomes of a specific decision.
iv. Negotiations that occur when both parties are focused on learning and
understanding the other side tend to also yield higher joint outcomes
than those in which parties are more interested in their individual
bottom-line outcomes.
Page
555
4. Compromise might be your worst enemy in negotiating a win-win agreement.

i. The reason is that compromising reduces the pressure to bargain
integratively.
ii. After all, if you or your opponent caves in easily, it doesnt require
anyone to be creative to reach a settlement. Thus, people end up
settling for less than they could have obtained if they had been forced
to consider the other partys interests, trade off issues, and be creative.
C. The Negotiation Process (Exhibit 14-7)
1. Preparation and Planning
a. Do your homework.
i. What is the nature of the conflict?
ii. What is the history leading up to this negotiation?
iii. Who is involved, and what are their perceptions of the conflict?
iv. What do you want from the negotiation?
v. What are your goals?
b. You also want to assess what you think are the other partys goals.
c. When you can anticipate your opponents position, you are better
equipped to counter his or her arguments with the facts and figures that
support your position.
d. Relationships will change as a result of a negotiation, so thats another
outcome to take into consideration.
i. If you could win a negotiation but push the other side into
resentment or animosity, it might be wiser to pursue a more
compromising style.
ii. If preserving the relationship will make you seem weak and easily
exploited, you may want to consider a more aggressive style.
iii. As an example of how the tone of a relationship set in negotiations
matters, consider that people who feel good about the process of a job
offer negotiation are more satisfied with their jobs and less likely to
turn over a year later regardless of their actual outcomes from these
negotiations.
e. Once you have gathered your information, use it to develop a strategy.
i. Determine your and the other sides Best Alternative to a Negotiated
Agreement (BATNA).
ii. Your BATNA determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a
negotiated agreement.
iii. Any offer you receive that is higher than your BATNA is better than
an impasse.
2. Definition of ground rules
a. Who will do the negotiating? Where will it take place? What time
constraints, if any, will apply?
b. To what issues will negotiation be limited? Will there be a specific
procedure to follow if an impasse is reached?
c. During this phase, the parties will also exchange their initial proposals or
demands.
Page
556
3. Clarification and justification

a. When initial positions have been exchanged, explain, amplify, clarify,
bolster, and justify your original demands.
b. This need not be confrontational.
c. You might want to provide the other party with any documentation that
helps support your position.
4. Bargaining and problem solving
a. The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give-and-take in trying
to hash out an agreement.
b. Concessions will undoubtedly need to be made by both parties.
5. Closure and implementation
a. The final stepformalizing the agreement that has been worked out and
developing any procedures that are necessary for implementation and
monitoring
b. Major negotiations will require hammering out the specifics in a formal
contract.
c. For most cases, however, closure of the negotiation process is nothing
more formal than a handshake.
D. Individual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness
1. Personality traits in negotiation
a. Can you predict an opponents negotiating tactics if you know something
about his/her personality? The evidence says sort of.
b. The evidence suggests that overall agreeableness is weakly related to
negotiation outcomes. Why is this the case?
i. It appears that the degree to which agreeableness, and personality
more generally, affects negotiation outcomes depends on the situation.
ii. The importance of being extraverted in negotiations, for example, will
very much depend on how the other party reacts to someone who is
assertive and enthusiastic.
iii. A recent study suggested that the type of negotiations matter as well.
In this study, agreeable individuals reacted more positively and felt
less stress (measured by their cortisol levels) in integrative
negotiations than in distributive ones.
(a) Low levels of stress, in turn, made for more effective negotiation
outcomes.
c. Research also suggests intelligence predicts negotiation effectiveness, but,
as with personality, the effects arent especially strong.
i. In a sense, these weak links are good news because they mean youre
not severely disadvantaged, even if youre an agreeable extrovert,
when it comes time to negotiate.
ii. We all can learn to be better negotiators.
iii. In fact, people who think so are more likely to do well in negotiations
because they persist in their efforts even in the face of temporary
setbacks.
Page
557
2. Moods/emotions in negotiation
a. Moods and emotions influence negotiation, but the way they do depends
on the type of negotiation.
i. 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.
b. Anxiety also appears to have an impact on negotiation.
i. For example, one study found that individuals who experienced more
anxiety about a negotiation used more deceptions in dealing with
others.
c. Another study found that anxious negotiators expect lower outcomes from
negotiations, respond to offers more quickly, and exit the bargaining
process more quickly, which leads them to obtain worse outcomes.
3. Culture in negotiations
a. Do people from different cultures negotiate differently? The simple
answer is the obvious one: yes, they do.
b. First, it appears that people generally negotiate more effectively within
cultures than between them.
i. For example, a Colombian is apt to do better negotiating with a
Colombian than with a Sri Lankan.
c. Second, it appears that in cross-cultural negotiations, it is especially
important that the negotiators be high in openness.
d. Finally, because emotions are culturally sensitive, negotiators need to be
especially aware of the emotional dynamics in cross-cultural negotiation.
4. Gender differences in negotiations
a. Men and women negotiate differently and those differences affect
outcomes.
b. A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative, pleasant, and
relationship-oriented in negotiations than are men.
c. There is some merit to this.
d. Men tend to place a higher value on status, power, and recognition,
whereas women tend to place a higher value on compassion and altruism.
e. Moreover, women do tend to value relationship outcomes more than men,
and men tend to value economic outcomes more than women.
f. These differences affect both negotiation behavior and negotiation
outcomes.
i. Compared to men, women tend to behave in a less assertive, less selfinterested, and more accommodating manner.
ii. However, the disparity goes even further than that. Because of the way
women approach negotiation, other negotiators seek to exploit female
negotiators by, for example, making lower salary offers.
g. So what can be done to change this troublesome state of affairs?
i. First, organizational culture plays a role here.
ii. If an organization, even unwittingly, encourages a predominantly
competitive model for negotiators, this will tend to increase genderstereotypic behaviors (men negotiating competitively, women
Page
558
negotiating cooperatively), and it will also increase backlash when

women go against stereotype.
iii. Second, at an individual level, women cannot directly control male
stereotypes of women. Fortunately, such stereotypes are fading.
However, women can control their own negotiating behavior.
V. Third-Party Negotiations
A. When individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate and are unable to
resolve their differences through direct negotiations, they may turn to a third
party.
B. A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using
reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the like.
1. They are widely used in labor-management negotiations and in civil court
disputes.
2. Their settlement rate is approximately 60 percent, with negotiator satisfaction
at about 75 percent.
3. The key to successthe conflicting parties must be motivated to bargain and
resolve their conflict, intensity cannot be too high, and the mediator must be
perceived as neutral and non-coercive.
C. An arbitrator is a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.
1. It can be voluntary (requested) or compulsory (forced on the parties by law or
contract).
2. The big plus of arbitration over mediation is that it always results in a
settlement.
D. A conciliator is a trusted third party who provides an informal communication
link among parties.
1. This role was made famous by Robert Duval in the first Godfather film.
2. Comparing its effectiveness to mediation has proven difficult.
3. Conciliators engage in fact finding, interpreting messages, and persuading
disputants to develop agreements.
VI. Summary and Implications for Managers
unit.
below:
Page
559
Myth or Science?
Teams Negotiate Better than Individuals in
Collectivistic Cultures
This exercise contributes to:

Learning Objectives: Apply the five steps of the negotiation process; Show how individual differences
influence negotiations
Learning Outcome: Describe the nature of conflict and the negotiation process
AACSB: Written and oral communication; Diverse and multicultural work environments; Reflective
thinking
According to a recent study, this statement appears to be false.

Page
560
In general, the literature has suggested that teams negotiate more effectively than
individuals negotiating alone. Some evidence indicates that team negotiations create
more ambitious goals, and that teams communicate more with each other than individual
negotiators do.
Common sense suggests that if this is indeed the case, it is especially true in collectivistic
cultures, where individuals are more likely to think of collective goals and be more
comfortable working in teams. A recent study of the negotiation of teams in the United
States and in Taiwan, however, suggests that this common sense is wrong. The
researchers conducted two studies comparing two-person teams with individual
negotiators. They defined negotiating effectiveness as the degree to which the negotiation
produced an optimal outcome for both sides. U.S. teams did better than solo individuals
in both studies. In Taiwan, solo individuals did better than teams.
Why did this happen? The researchers determined that in Taiwan norms respecting
harmony already exist, and negotiating in teams only amplifies that tendency. This poses
a problem because when norms for cooperation are exceptionally high, teams satisfice
to avoid conflict. In contrast, since because the United States is individualistic, solo teams
may only amplify their tendencies to focus solely on their own interests, which makes
reaching integrative solutions harder.
Overall, these findings suggest that negotiating individually works best in collectivistic
cultures, and negotiating in teams works best in individualistic cultures.
Sources: Based on M. J. Gelfand, J. Brett, B. C. Gunia, L. Imai, T. Huang, et al., Toward a Culture-by-Context Perspective on
Negotiation: Negotiating Teams in the United States and Taiwan, Journal of Applied Psychology 98 (2013), pp. 504-513; and A.
Graf, S. T. Koeszegi, and E.-M. Pesendorfer, Electronic Negotiations in Intercultural Interfirm Relationships, Journal of
Managerial Psychology 25 (2010), pp. 495-512.
Class Exercise
1. Ask students to read the paper at http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/culturalservices/articles/cross-cultural-negotiation.html.
2. Divide the class into task teams of three to five students each.
3. Have each task team select a country in which to create a joint venture with a
local company.
4. Each team should create a plan for the upcoming negotiations for the joint
venture.
5. The plan should include how the team perceives the negotiation issues. The paper
should be addressed to meet its joint venture objective.
Page
561
glOBalization!
Trust Is an Issue

AACSB: Written and oral communication; Diverse and multicultural work environments; Reflective
thinking
Research has shown that one of the greatest barriers in negotiating across cultures is trust.
People in one culture are generally less trusting of those in another, including when
negotiating.
One study of Indian and U.S. negotiators found, for example, that respondents reported
having less trust in their cross-culture negotiation counterparts. These lower levels of
trust were associated with lower discovery of common interests between parties, which
occurred because cross-culture negotiators were less willing to disclose and solicit
information.
Another study found that both U.S. and Chinese negotiators tended to have an in-group
bias, which led them to favor negotiating partners from their own cultures. For Chinese
negotiators, this was particularly true when accountability requirements were high.
So what can we do to establish trust and reduce in-group cultural favoritism? The first
and foremost step is to recognize that it is critical to build trust: try to get to know your
counter-part, begin with small wins, and continue to communicate your interests and
check your understanding of your counterparts interests. The challenges of cross-cultural
negotiation mean that the tactics weve described in this chapter are even more important
to successful negotiations.
Sources: Based on B. Gunia, J. Brett, and A. Nandkeolyar, In Global Negotiations, Its All About Trust, Harvard Business Review
(December 2012), p. 26; W. Liu, R. Friedman, and Y. Hong, Culture and Accountability in Negotiation: Recognizing the Importance
of In-Group Relations, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 117 (2012), pp. 221-234; and B. C. Gunia, J. M.
Brett, A. K. Nandkeolyar, and D. Kamdar, Paying a Price: Culture, Trust, and Negotiation Consequences, Journal of Applied
Psychology 96, no. 4 (2010), pp. 774789.
Class Exercise
1. Ask students to watch the video on the development of business in India and
China at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8liTZBhDQ3o.
2. Have students break into discussion groups to talk about the differences in the two
countries and how those differences reflect each culture.
3. What are the implications of these differences for business people in each
country? How might those differences be reflected in negotiating styles?
Page
562
4. Have the students write a short white paper defining the concepts they would have
to address if they were part of a negotiating team in talks with a Chinese
manufacturer, as compared to a manufacturer from India.
Teaching Notes
This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as
BlackBoard 9.1, Breeze, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See
http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information.
An Ethical Choice
Using Empathy to Negotiate More Ethically
AACSB: Written and oral communication; Ethical understanding and reasoning; Reflective thinking
You may have noticed that much of our advice for negotiating effectively depends on
understanding the perspective and goals of the person with whom you are negotiating.
Preparing checklists of your negotiation partners interests, likely tactics, and BATNA
have all been shown to improve negotiation outcomes. Can these steps make you a more
ethical negotiator as well? Studies suggest that it might.
Researchers asked respondents to indicate how much they tended to think about other
peoples feelings and emotions and to describe the types of tactics they engaged in during
a negotiation exercise. More empathetic individuals consistently engaged in fewer
unethical negotiation behaviors like making false promises and manipulating information,
and emotions. To put this in terms familiar to you from personality research, it appears
that individuals who are higher in agreeableness will be more ethical negotiators.
When considering how to improve your ethical negotiation behavior, follow these
guidelines:
1. Try to understand your negotiation partners perspective, not just by understanding
cognitively what the other person wants, but by empathizing with the emotional
reaction he or she will have to the possible outcomes.
2. Be aware of your own emotions, because many moral reactions are fundamentally
emotional. One study found that engaging in unethical negotiation strategies
increased feelings of guilt, so by extension, feeling guilty in a negotiation may mean
you are engaging in behavior youll regret later.
3. Beware of empathizing so much that you work against your own interests. Just
because you try to understand the motives and emotional reactions of the other side
Page
563
does not mean you have to assume the other person is going to be honest and fair in
return. So be on guard.
Sources: Based on T. R. Cohen, Moral Emotions and Unethical Bargaining: The Differential Effects of Empathy and Perspective
Taking in Deterring Deceitful Negotiation, Journal of Business Ethics 94, no. 4 (2010), pp. 569579; and R. Volkema, D. Fleck, and
A. Hofmeister, Predicting Competitive-Unethical Negotiating Behavior and Its Consequences, Negotiation Journal 26, no. 3 (2010),
pp. 263286.
Class Exercise
1. Divide the class into teams of two.
2. Each team is to role play a negotiation on the rental of a venue for a fraternity
party concert (one students role) and the rental ballroom owner (the other
students role). The ballroom is privately owned and has, in the past, charged
renters by the person attending or a flat rate. In addition, in the past, the rental
owner required refreshments and beverages to be purchased through his
organization. And the owner requires security throughout the evening in the
parking lot and inside to ensure no conflicts occur.
3. The two should try to use empathy as a basis for the negotiations. See the guide at
http://www.negotiationinstitute.com/column/empathy-critical-skill-usenegotiations.
4. Have the class observe the negotiations of four of the teams. Rate the teams on
improvement of the use of empathy from the first group to the last.
Teaching Notes
Point/Counterpoint
Pro Sports Strikes Are Caused by Greedy Owners
Learning Objectives: Show how individual differences influence negotiations; Assess the role of third party
negotiations
AACSB: Written and oral communication; Reflective thinking
Point
Im as sick as anyone of the constant strikes, lockouts, and back-and-forth negotiations
between sports teams and the players unions. Of the major pro sports leagues, Major
League Baseball (MLB) is the only one not to have had a strike or lockout since 2010
Page
564
and it has already had 8 eight in its history. Youve got to wonder why this keeps
happening. Heres why: owners greed knows no limit.
In nearly every recent strike or lockout, the main issue was money and how to divide it.
When the National Hockey League (NHL) locked out the players during the 20122013
season, the owners were the instigators. They wanted to reduce the players share of
hockey revenues. They wanted to eliminate salary arbitration. They wanted to introduce
term limits to contracts. They wanted to change free-agency rules and eliminate signing
bonuses. On a philosophical level, some of these proposals are interesting because they
reveal that owners want to restrict competition when it suits them and increase it when it
benefits them.
This summer, while the owners were whining about the unfairness of long-term contracts,
the Minnesota Wilds owner Craig Leipold, a noted negotiations hawk, signed Zach
Parise and Ryan Suter to identical 13-year, $98 million contracts. Contracts like these
suggest that owners want the players union to save them from themselves.
Perhaps some of this would make sense if the owners were losing money hand over fist,
but that is hardly the case. The NHL is now a $3.3 billion business, and it continues to
grow. The owners arent hurting, either. Most are millionaires many times over. Los
Angeles Kings owner Philip Anschutz is reported to have a net worth of $7 billion.
Forbes reports the average NFL team is now worth over more than $1.1 billion and made
$41 million last year. Even low revenue and poorly run teams make money. Take the
Jacksonville Jaguars. Wayne Weaver paid $208 million for the team in 1993. It has never
made it to the Super Bowl and is almost always an also-ran in its division. Did the teams
ineffectiveness really cost Weaver? He sold the club for $770 million in 2012.
In essence, what we have are rich owners trying to negotiate rules that keep them from
competing with one another for players. Its a bald-faced and hypocritical attempt to use
their own kind of union to negotiate favorable agreements, all the while criticizing the
players unions.
Counterpoint
Major league owners are an easy target. But they have the most to lose from work
stoppages. Its the players and their unions who push the envelope.
Its true that most major league players are well rewarded for their exceptional talents and
the risks they take. Its also true that owners who are able to invest in teams are
wealthyinvestors usually are. But the fault for disputes lies with spoiled playersand
the union leaders who burnish their credentials and garner the limelight by fanning the
flames of discontent.
Page
565
On this latter point, give all the credit in the world to the union negotiators (paid millions
themselves), who do nothing if not hawk publicity and use hardball negotiating tactics.
Take the NHL players union boss Donald Fehr. For a recent negotiation set to begin at
10 A.M., he arrived at 11:15. At exactly 12:00, he announced he had a lunch meeting
uptown and left.
As for the players, pro athletes are entitled almost by definition. For example, one
recently retired NFL player and union representative, Chester Pitts, was commenting
about how he had to settle for an $85,000 Mercedes instead of a $250,000 car. Well, we
all have to make sacrifices. One rookie, Jets quarterback Geno Smith, fired his agent
after signing only a four-year contract for roughly $4.99 million. Smith called the
contract hard to stomach. I see a future in the players union for this guy.
Do we really need labor unions for workers whose average salaries are $1,900,000
(NFL), $2,400,000 (NHL), $3,310,000 (MLB), and $5,150,000 (NBA)? NHL clubs spent
76 percent of their gross revenues on players salaries and collectively lost $273 million
the year before the most recent lockout. Its not much better in the NBA, where many
teams lose money. Take the Dallas Mavericks, who have rarely made money once since
2002, despite playing in the fourth most populous metro area and winning the NBA title
in 2012.
Its easy to argue that major league sports have an unusual number of labor disputes, but
thats not necessarily accurate. Did you hear about the 2013 Turkish Airlines strike, or
the worldwide strikes in the fast food industry in 2013? Sports strikes interest us, but we
shouldnt fall into the trap of blaming these on the owners.
Sources: J. Feinstein, In the NHL Lockout, the Owners Have It All Wrong, Washington Post (December 25, 2012), downloaded
May 29, 2013, from http://articles.washingtonpost.com/; R. Cimini, Geno Smith's Maturity Questioned, ESPN (May 3, 2013),
downloaded May 3, 2013, from http://espn.go.com/; K. Campbell, Thanks to Donald Fehr, NHL Negotiating against Itself...and
Losing, The Hockey News (December 29, 2012), downloaded May 29, 2013, from http://sports.yahoo.com/; and M. Ozanian, Dallas
Cowboys Lead NFL with $2.1 Billion Valuation, Forbes (September 5, 2012), downloaded May 20, 2013, from
http://www.forbes.com/.
Class Exercise
1. Divide the class into paired teams of three to five students each.
2. Have one group in a pair take the Point side and the other the Counterpoint side.
3. Have the groups prepare a debate (see
http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/de/pd/instr/strats/debates/QandA.pdf for guidance).
4. Ask pairs to present debates before the class.
5. The class should vote on which side prevails in the debate.
Page
566
Questions for Review

14-1. What are the differences between the traditional and interactionist views of
conflict?
Answer: The traditionalist view of conflict is the belief that all conflict is harmful
and must be avoided. The current view is the interactionist view of conflict or the
belief that conflict is not only a positive force in a group but also that it is
absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively.
Learning Objective: Differentiate between the traditional and interactionist views of conflict
AACSB: Reflective thinking
14-2. What are the three types of conflict and the three loci of conflict?
Answer: The three types of conflict are:
1. Task conflict: conflict over content and goals of the work.
2. Relationship conflict: conflict based on interpersonal relationships.
3. Process conflict: conflict over how work gets done.
The three loci of conflict are:
1. Dyadic conflict: conflict that occurs between two people.
2. Intragroup conflict: conflict that occurs within a group or team.
3. Intergroup conflict: conflict between groups or teams.
Learning Objective: Describe the three types of conflict and the three loci of conflict
14-3. What are the steps of the conflict process?

Answer:
Stage I: Potential opposition or incompatibilityThe first step in the conflict
process is the presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise.
These conditions have been condensed into three general categories:
communication, structure, and personal variables.
Stage II: Cognition and personalizationThe antecedent conditions can lead to
conflict only when one or more of the parties are affected by, and aware of, the
conflict. Just because a conflict is perceived does not mean that it is personalized.
It is important because it is where conflict issues tend to be defined.
Stage III: IntentionsIntentions are decisions to act in a given way. Exhibit 14
2 represents one authors effort to identify the primary conflict-handling
intentions. Two dimensionscooperativeness and assertiveness. Five conflicthandling intentions can be identified: competing (assertive and uncooperative),
collaborating (assertive and cooperative), avoiding (unassertive and
uncooperative), accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and compromising
(midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness).
Stage IV: BehaviorThe behavior stage includes the statements, actions, and
reactions made by the conflicting parties. These conflict behaviors are usually
Page
567
overt attempts to implement each partys intentions. Exhibit 143 provides a way
of visualizing conflict behavior. Exhibit 144 lists the major resolution and
stimulation techniques that allow managers to control conflict levels.
Stage V: OutcomesOutcomes may be functional in that the conflict results in
an improvement in the groups performance, or dysfunctional in that it hinders
group performance. Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of
decisions, stimulates creativity and innovation, etc. Dysfunctional outcomes
uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties,
and eventually leads to the destruction of the group. Among the more undesirable
consequences are a retarding of communication, reductions in group
cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting
between members.
Learning Objective: Outline the conflict process
14-4. What are the differences between distributive and integrative bargaining?
Answer: Distributive bargaining is negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed
amount of resources; a win-lose situation. Integrative bargaining is negotiation
that seeks one or more settlements that can create a win-win solution. Exhibit 145 shows that these approaches to bargaining differ in their goal and motivation,
focus, interests, information sharing and duration of relationship.
Learning Objective: Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining
14-5. What are the five steps in the negotiation process?

Answer: Exhibit 14-7 shows a model of the negotiation process. It includes the
preparation and planning, definition of ground rules, clarification and
justification, bargaining and problem solving, and closure and implementation.
Learning Objective: Apply the five steps of the negotiation process
14-6. How do individual differences influence negotiations?

Answer: Personality and gender can both influence negotiations. Personality
traits like extroverts and agreeable people are weaker at distributive negotiation.
In contrast, disagreeable introverts are best at this type of negotiation. Intelligence
is also a weak indicator of bargaining. With gender, men and women negotiate the
same way, but may experience different outcomes. Women and men take on
gender stereotypes in negotiations such as tender and tough. In addition, women
are less likely to negotiate.
Learning Objective: Show how individual differences influence negotiations
Page
568
14-7. What are the roles and functions of third-party negotiations?

Answer: There are 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.
Learning Objective: Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations
Experiential Exercise
A Negotiation Role-Play
Learning Objective: Apply the five steps of the negotiation process
Instructions
This role-play is designed to help students develop their negotiating skills. The class is to
break into pairs. One person will play the role of Alex, the department supervisor. The
other person will play C.J., Alexs boss. Both participants should read The Situation and
The Negotiation, listed below, and then their role only.
The Situation
Alex and C.J. work for Nike in Portland, Oregon. Alex supervises a research laboratory.
C.J. is the manager of research and development. Alex and C.J. are former college
runners who have worked for Nike for more than six years. C.J. has been Alexs boss for
2 years. One of Alexs employees has greatly impressed Alex. This employee is Lisa
Roland. Lisa was hired 11 months ago. She is 24 years old and holds a masters degree in
mechanical engineering. Her entry-level salary was $47,500 a year. She was told by Alex
that, in accordance with corporation policy, she would receive an initial performance
evaluation at 6 months and a comprehensive review after 1 year. Based on her
performance record, Lisa was told she could expect a salary adjustment at the time of the
1-year evaluation.
Alexs evaluation of Lisa after 6 months was very positive. Alex commented on the long
hours Lisa was putting in, her cooperative spirit, the fact that others in the lab enjoyed
Page
569
working with her, and that she was making an immediate positive impact on the project
she had been assigned. Now that Lisas first anniversary is coming up, Alex has again
reviewed Lisas performance. Alex thinks Lisa may be the best new person the R&D
group has ever hired. After only a year, Alex has ranked Lisa as the number-three
performer in a department of 11.
Salaries in the department vary greatly. Alex, for instance, has a basic salary of $86,000,
plus eligibility for a bonus that might add another $7,000 to $12,000 a year. The salary
range of the 11 department members is $48,400 to $76,350. The lowest salary is a recent
hire with a bachelors degree in physics. The two people that Alex has rated above Lisa
earn base salaries of $69,200 and $76,350. Theyre both 27 years old and have been at
Nike for three and four years, respectively. The median salary in Alexs department is
$64,960.
The Negotiation
Alex has a meeting scheduled with C.J. to discuss Lisas performance review and salary
adjustment. Take a couple of minutes to think through the facts in this exercise and to
prepare a strategy. Then you have up to 15 minutes to conduct your negotiation. When
your negotiation is complete, the class will compare the various strategies used and pair
outcomes.
Alexs Role
You want to give Lisa a big raise. While shes young, she has proven to be an excellent
addition to the department. You dont want to lose her. More importantly, she knows in
general what other people in the department are earning and she thinks she is underpaid.
The company typically gives 1-year raises of 5 percent, although 10 percent is not
unusual, and 20 to 30 percent increases have been approved on occasion. Youd like to
get Lisa as large an increase as C. J. will approve.
C.J.s Role
All your supervisors typically try to squeeze you for as much money as they can for their
people. You understand this because you did the same thing when you were a supervisor,
but your boss wants to keep a lid on costs. He wants you to keep raises for recent hires
generally in the 5-to-8 percent range. In fact, he has sent a memo to all managers and
supervisors saying this. He also said that managers would be evaluated on their ability to
maintain budgetary control. However, your boss is also concerned with equity and paying
people what theyre worth. You feel assured that he will support any salary
recommendation you make, as long as it can be justified. Your goal, consistent with cost
reduction, is to keep salary increases as low as possible.
Teaching Notes
1. The process for running the exercise is self-explanatory.
2. Consider assigning some pairs a distributive strategy and some an integrative
strategy. This will permit a comparison of results for discussion.
Page
570
3. Consider your gender mix in the pairs, if you want to include a discussion of
male/female negotiating strategies.
4. For the sake of time, this exercise can also be conducted as a fish bowl using
only one pair of students and having the rest of the class observe.
Ethical Dilemma
The Lowball Applicant
AACSB: Written and oral communication; Ethical understanding and reasoning; Reflective thinking
Consider this first-person account:

I am a human resource manager, so I interview people every day. Sometimes the
managers in my company ask me to pre-screen candidates, which I do after discussing
the job at length with the manager. I usually start the candidate screening with a few
personality-job fit tests; then conduct an interview, following a list of job-specific
questions the manager has given me; and finally discuss the job requirements, our
company, and the pay/benefits. By that time in the process, the candidate usually has a
good idea of the job and is eager to suggest a high level of pay at the top of the advertised
bracket or, often, above the pay bracket. However, this isnt always the case. One time in
particular, an excellent candidate with outstanding qualifications surprised me by saying
that since she wanted flextime, she would accept a rate below the pay bracket. Confused,
I asked her if she wanted a reduction in hours below fulltime. She said no, she expected
to work full-time and only wanted to come in a little late and would leave a little late to
make up the time. I guess she figured this was a concession worth slashing her salary for,
but our company has flextime. In fact, she could have asked for 5 fewer hours per week,
still been considered full-time by our company policies, and negotiated for above the
advertised pay grade. I knew the manager would be highly interested in this candidate
and that he could probably get her to work the longer full-time hours at a lower rate of
pay. That outcome might be best for the company, or it might not. She obviously didnt
fully understand the company policies in her favor, and she was unsophisticated about her
worth in the marketplace. What should I have done?
Page
571
Questions
14-8. If the human resource manager coached the applicant to request a higher salary,
did the coaching work against the interests of the organization? What was the
responsibility of the human resource manager to put the organizations financial
interests first?
Answer: The students responses to this question will vary depending on
individual ethical position. Those with a position that this violated the client
relationship will likely base it on a contractual obligation. Those in favor of the
action will probably emphasize that by working toward the higher salary,
potential future conflict over inequity was averted.
14-9. What do you see as the potential downside of the human resource manager
abstaining from discussing the pay issue further with the candidate?
Answer: Responses to this question will vary by student, but many will suggest
that if no discussions take place, there is the potential for issues related to trust
and ethics to emerge.
14-10. If the candidate were hired at the reduced rate she proposed, how might the
situation play out over the next year when she gets to know the organization and
pay standards better?
Answer: Again, responses to this question will vary by student. Some will argue
that the candidate will feel violated that the organization has taken advantage of
the situation. Others though, may contend that this could ultimately serve to
strengthen the job candidate.
Case Incident 1
Choosing Your Battles
While much of this chapter has discussed methods for achieving harmonious
relationships and getting out of conflicts, its also important to remember there are
situations in which too little conflict can be a problem. As we noted, in creative problemsolving teams, some level of task conflict early in the process of formulating a solution
can be an important stimulus to innovation.
However, the conditions must be right for productive conflict. In particular, individuals
must feel psychologically safe in bringing up issues for discussion. If people fear that
Page
572
what they say is going to be held against them, they may be reluctant to speak up or rock
the boat. Experts suggest that effective conflicts have three key characteristics: they
should (1) speak to what is possible, (2) be compelling, and (3) involve uncertainty.
So how should a manager pick a fight? First, ensure that the stakes are sufficient to
actually warrant a disruption. Second, focus on the future, and on how to resolve the
conflict rather than on whom to blame. Third, tie the conflict to fundamental values.
Rather than concentrating on winning or losing, encourage both parties to see how
successfully exploring and resolving the conflict will lead to optimal outcomes for all. If
managed successfully, some degree of open disagreement can be an important way for
companies to manage simmering and potentially destructive conflicts.
Do these principles work in real organizations? The answer is yes. Dropping its old ways
of handling scheduling and logistics created a great deal of conflict at Burlington
Northern Santa Fe railroad, but applying these principles to managing the conflict helped
the railroad adopt a more sophisticated system and recover its competitive position in the
transportation industry. Doug Conant, CEO of Campbell Soup, increased functional
conflicts in his organization by emphasizing a higher purpose to the organizations efforts
rather than focusing on whose side was winning a conflict. Thus, a dysfunctional conflict
environment changed dramatically and the organization was able to move from one of the
worlds worst-performing food companies to one that was recognized as a top performer
by both the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and Fortune 500 data on employee morale.
Sources: Based on S. A. Joni and D. Beyer, How to Pick a Good Fight, Harvard Business Review (December 2009), pp. 4857; and
B. H. Bradley, B. E. Postlewaite, A. C. Klotz, M. R. Hamdani, and K. G. Brown., Reaping the Benefits of Task Conflict in Teams:
The Critical Role of Team Psychological Safety Climate, Journal of Applied Psychology, Advance publication (July 4, 2011), doi:
10.1037/a0024200.
Questions
14-11. How could you ensure sufficient discussion of contentious issues in a work
group? How can managers bring unspoken conflicts into the open without making
them worse?
Answer: The answers to this question will vary. Some students will indicate that
conforming the process to the concepts of equity theory is the best way to lead the
discussions to work. If all parties believe they are equally represented in the
discussion, then it is more likely to remain positive. To access unspoken conflict,
the manager should encourage all employees to bring up their concerns. Again,
perceptions of fairness are essential to making this work.
14-12. How can negotiators utilize conflict management strategies to their advantage so
that differences in interests lead not to dysfunctional conflicts but rather to
positive integrative solutions?
Answer: Exhibit 14-4 shows major resolution and stimulation techniques that
allow managers to control conflict levels. The students answers to this question
should include ideas contained in this exhibit.
Page
573
14-13. Can you think of situations in your own life in which silence has worsened a
conflict between parties? What might have been done differently to ensure that
open communication facilitated collaboration instead?
Answer: This questions answer will be the opinion of the student.
Case Incident 2
Twinkies, Rubber Rooms, and Collective Bargaining
U.S. labor unions have seen a dramatic decline in membership in the private sector,
where only 6.5 percent of the employees are unionized. The situation is very different in
the public sector, however, where 40 percent of government employees are unionized.
These numbers are the result of very different trends in the 1950s, the situation was
approximately reversed, with roughly 35 percent of private-sector workers and 12 percent
of public-sector employees belonging to unions.
Research suggests two core reasons why public-sector unions have grown. First, changes
in state and national labor laws have made it easier for public-sector unions to organize.
Some also argue that enforcement agencies have tolerated anti-union actions in the
private sector. Second, the location of private-sector jobs has changed; high-paying union
jobs in the manufacturing sector, the steel industry, and other former bastions of privatesector unionization have mostly gone overseas, or to the South, where its harder to
organize workers. On the other hand, its difficult to move government jobs away from
the communities they serve. A Philadelphia school, for example, couldnt just decide it
was going to relocate its teachers to Atlanta. Also, public-sector labor forces tend to be
more static than in the private sector. More plants than post offices have closed.
Are these trends problems? Though this is partly a political question, lets look at it
objectively in terms of plusses and minuses.
On the positive side, by negotiating as a collective, unionized workers are able to earn, on
average, roughly 15 percent more than their non-union counterparts. Unions also can
protect the rights of workers against capricious actions by employers. Consider the
following example:
Lydia criticized the work of five of her co-workers. They were not amused and
posted angry messages on a Facebook page. Lydia complained to her supervisor
that the postings violated the employer's "zero tolerance" policy against "bullying
and harassment." The employer investigated and, agreeing that its policy had
Page
574
been violated, fired the five. The National Labor Relations Board, however, ruled
this an unfair labor practice and ordered reinstatements.
Most of us would probably prefer not to be fired for Facebook posts. This is a protection
unions can provide.
On the negative side, public-sector unions at times have been able to negotiate
employment arrangements that are hard to sustain. For more than 25 years, the union that
represents Californias prison guards the California Correctional Peace Officers
Association (CCPOA) lobbied the state to increase the number of prisons and to
increase sentences (such as via the three strikes law). The lobbying worked; prisons
were built, the prison population exploded, and thousands of new guards were hired. The
average CCPOA member now makes more than $100,000 per year and can retire at age
50 with 90 percent of salary as pension. California now spends more money on prisons
than on education.
Further, it is often extremely difficult to fire a member of a public-sector union, even if
performance is exceptionally poor. Aryeh Eller, 46, a former music teacher at Hillcrest
High School in Queens, was pulled from the classroom for repeated sexual harassment of
female students, a charge to which he has admitted. While in the rubber room, where
union members unfit to work are paid their full wage to just sit, Eller has seen his salary
increase to $85,000 due to automatic seniority increases under the teachers union
contract. Such protections exist for teachers in nearly every state, protecting even those
arrested for having sex with minors and giving minors drugs. Teachers are not alone.
There are rubber rooms for many types of union jobs.
Reasonable people can disagree about the pros and cons of unions, and whether they help
or hinder an organizations ability to be successful. There isnt any dispute, however, that
they often figure prominently in the study of workplace conflict and negotiation
strategies.
Sources: Aryeh Eller, New York Teacher Removed from Classroom for Sexual Harassment, Paid Nearly $1 Million to Do Nothing,
Huffington Post (January 28, 2013), downloaded May 20, 2013, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com; Hispanics United of Buffalo,
Inc. and Carlos Ortiz, Case 03CA027872, National Labor Relations Board (December 14, 2012), downloaded May 13, 2013, from
http://www.nlrb.gov/cases-decisions/board-decisions; and J. Weissmann, Who's to Blame for the Hostess Bankruptcy: Wall Street,
Unions, or Carbs? The Atlantic (November 16, 2012), downloaded on May 29, 2013, from http://www.theatlantic.com/.
Questions
14-14. Labormanagement negotiations might be characterized as more distributive than
integrative. Do you agree? Why do you think this is the case? What, if anything,
would you do about it?
Answer: The response to this question will vary depending on the students
opinion.
14-15. If unions have negotiated unreasonable agreements, what responsibility does
management or the administration bear for agreeing to these terms? Why do you
think they do agree?
Page
575
Answer: Again, student response depends on opinion. But, one idea that should
come from the process is that some believe that mediation is a trade-off to justice.
Instead of legal disputes being resolved in the judicial system that calls for
decision to be made by peer groups, mediation results in resolutions fostered by a
single professional. The goal of mediation is harmony, not justice.
14-16. If you were advising union and management representatives about how to
negotiate an agreement, drawing from the concepts in this chapter, what would
you tell them?
Answer: Again, responses to this question will vary based on the opinion of the
student.
Instructors Choice
Negotiating with the Labor Relations Board
Power struggles often end up as negotiation and bargaining scenarios. One place to trace
historic negotiations between management and labor is the National Labor Relations
Board website (see www.nlrb.gov). Go to the website and link to Case Summaries found
under the News Room menu. Choose a famous case, summarize the conflict, describe the
negotiation issues, and summarize the eventual outcome of the case. Once you have done
this, indicate the form of conflict present and how the negotiation process helped to
resolve the conflict.
Instructor Discussion
The NLRB website has several famous cases documented and filed. It is interesting that
the NLRB often changes its political stance on issues as members often change as new
governmental administrations are brought into power. For this reason, the viewer can see
that some issues are revisited. It is useful to present a contemporary case to illustrate the
negotiation process. Since the website is updated frequently, the instructor can choose a
case that has just been heard or one that is more classical in nature. Based on the way the
case is presented on the website, the instructor could present the case without revealing
the ruling and have the students try to determine what the eventual ruling (and justifying
reasons) was.
Page
576
Teaching Notes
Exploring OB Topics on the Web

Learning Objectives: Outline the conflict process; Apply the five steps of the negotiation process
1.
Lets start out with a laugh. Go to

http://www.despair.com/demotivators/dysfunction.html and see what their
commentary is for dysfunction. While you are there, feel free to look at some of
the other posters that spoof traditional motivational posters found on the walls
of businesses and schools. Enjoy!
2.
How do you handle conflict when it arises? Seven guidelines for handling conflict
can be found at http://www.mediate.com/articles/jordan2.cfm. Think of a conflict
you are involved in or have been involved in recently. How could you have
applied these guidelines to that situation? Is there room for improvement in your
conflict management skills? Write a short reflection paper (or a paragraph or two)
on one of the guidelines and how you plan to use it in future conflicts.
3.
If you have never been involved in labor negotiations, it can be a challenging

taskespecially if you lack experience in the process. Preparation is key. Every
manager should have an understanding of the process. Learn more at
http://www.mediate.com/articles/lynnK.cfm. Are there lessons in this article that
could be applied to any negotiation processfor example, buying a car,
negotiating a contract with a vendor, etc.? Think of a circumstance where you
might find yourself explaining a negotiation process to a friend and the skills
necessary to be successful. (Use the article for ideas.) Write out the scenario and
skills and bring it to class.
4.
Negotiating with other cultures requires an understanding of the culture and the
individuals with whom you are negotiating. Go to
http://www.mediate.com/articles/lauchli.cfm to learn more about negotiation and
dispute resolution with the Chinese. As the book has discussed, the Chinese are a
collectivist culture, different in many ways from Americans. Write two or three
things of interest you learned from reading this article and bring it to class.
Page
577
5.
Read the article by Stella Ting-Toomey entitled Intercultural Conflict

Management: A Mindful Approach at:
http://www.uri.edu/iaics/content/2008v17n4/02%20Ling%20Chen%20&%20Kat
%20Cheung.pdf. Write a short synopsis of the three major points of the paper.
What is the most interesting or intriguing idea put forth in the paper? Do you
agree or disagree with her assessments? Bring your written work to class for
further discussion.
6.
The University of Colorado offers a great deal of information regarding conflict

management on their website. One page provides abstracts of selected readings on
transformative conflict resolution. Some readings are more global in nature
others are geared to the organization. Go to
http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/transform/abslist.htm and select three abstracts
of interest to you. Print them off and bring them to class. Prepare a short
presentation on what you learned from these articles. Be prepared to talk about
them in front of the class or in small groups.

Conflict and Negotiation: Learning Catalytics Questions: Instructor Directions and Follow-Up

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Conflict and Negotiation: Learning Catalytics Questions: Instructor Directions and Follow-Up

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chapter 14 Conflict and Negotiation