Conflict and Negotiation in the Workplace

McGraw-Hill/Irwin McShane/Von Glinow OB 5e

Copyright 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Conflict Defined
The process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party

11-2

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: Pre 1970s View

Historically, experts viewed conflict as dysfunctional
Undermined relations Wasted human energy More job dissatisfaction,
Good

Conflict outcomes

turnover, stress Less productivity, information sharing

Bad Low

Level of conflict

High

11-3

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: 1970s1990s View

1970s to 1990s belief in an optimal level of conflict Some level of conflict is good because:
Energizes debate Reexamine assumptions Improves responsiveness to
Good Optimal conflict

Conflict outcomes

external environment Increases team cohesion

Bad Low

Level of conflict

High

11-4

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: Emerging View

Two types of conflict

Constructive conflict -- Conflict is aimed at issue,

not parties Relationship conflict -- Conflict is aimed at undermining the other party

11-5

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: Emerging View

Problem: difficult to separate constructive from relationship conflict

Drive to defend activated

Conflict outcomes

Goal: encourage constructive conflict, minimize relationship conflict

Good

Constructive conflict

0 Relationship conflict

when ideas are critiqued

Bad Low

Level of conflict

High

11-6

Constructive Confrontation at Intel

Intel employees learn to fully evaluate ideas through constructive confrontation. The objective is to attack the problem, not the employee, but some critics claim the process is a license for some Intel staff to be bullies.
11-7

Minimizing Relationship Conflict

Three conditions that minimize relationship conflict while engaging in constructive conflict
1. Emotional intelligence 2. Cohesive team 3. Supportive team norms
11-8

The Conflict Process

Conflict Perceptions Sources of Conflict Conflict Emotions Manifest Conflict Conflict Outcomes

Conflict Escalation Cycle

11-9

Structural Sources of Conflict

Incompatible Goals
One partys goals perceived to interfere with others goals

Differentiation

Different values/beliefs Explains cross-cultural and generational conflict

Task Interdependence

Conflict increases with interdependence Parties more likely to interfere with each other
more
11-10

Structural Sources of Conflict

Scarce Resources
Motivates competition for the resource

Ambiguous Rules

Creates uncertainty, threatens goals Without rules, people rely on politics

Communication Problems

Increases stereotyping Reduces motivation to communicate Escalates conflict when arrogant

11-11

Interpersonal Conflict Handling Styles

Win-win orientation
believe parties will find a mutually beneficial

solution

Win-lose orientation
belief that the more one party receives, the less the

other receives

11-12

Five Conflict Handling Styles

High

Forcing

Problem-solving

Assertiveness

Compromising

Avoiding
Low

Yielding

Cooperativeness

High
11-13

Conflict Handling Contingencies

Problem solving
Best when: - Interests are not perfectly opposing - Parties have trust/openness - Issues are complex Problem: other party take advantage of information

Forcing
Best when: - you have a deep conviction about your position - quick resolution required - other party would take advantage of cooperation Problems: relationship conflict, long-term relations
11-14

Conflict Handling Contingencies

Avoiding
Best when: - relationship conflict is high - conflict resolution cost is higher than benefits Problems: doesnt resolve conflict, frustration

Yielding
Best when: - other party has much more power - issue is much less important to you than other party - value/logic of your position is imperfect Problem: Increases other partys expectations
11-15

Conflict Handling Contingencies

Compromising
Best when - Parties have equal power - Quick solution is required - Parties lack trust/openness Problem: Sub-optimal solution where mutual gains

are possible

11-16

Structural Approaches to Conflict Resolution

1. Emphasizing superordinate goals
Emphasize common objective rather than

conflicting sub-goals Reduces goal incompatibility and differentiation

2. Reducing differentiation
Remove sources of different values and beliefs - e.g. Move employees around to different jobs

11-17

Structural Approaches to Conflict Resolution (cont)

3. Improving communication/understanding
Employees understand and appreciate each

others views through communication

- Relates to contact hypothesis

Two warnings: a) Apply communication/understanding after reducing differentiation b) A Western strategy that may conflict with values/traditions in other cultures

11-18

Structural Approaches to Conflict Resolution (cont)

4. Reduce Task Interdependence
Dividing shared resources
Combine tasks Use buffers

5. Increase Resources
Duplicate resources

6. Clarify Rules and Procedures

Clarify resource distribution
Change interdependence
11-19

Resolving Conflict Through Negotiation

Negotiation -- attempting to resolve divergent goals by redefining terms of interdependence Which conflict handling style is best in negotiation?
Begin cautiously with problem-solving style Shift to a win-lose style when - Mutual gains situation isnt apparent - Other part wont reciprocate info sharing

11-20

Bargaining Zone Model

Your Positions
Initial Target Resistance

Area of Potential Agreement

Resistance

Target

Initial

Opponents Positions

11-21

Situational Influences on Negotiation

Location Physical setting Time passage and deadlines Audience

Courtesy of Microsoft

11-22

Effective Negotiation Behavior

Preparation and goal setting Gathering information Communicating effectively Making concessions

Courtesy of Microsoft

11-23

Types of Third Party Intervention

High

Mediation

Inquisition

Level of Process Control

Arbitration
Low

Level of Outcome Control

High

11-24

Choosing the Best 3rd Party Strategy

Managers prefer inquisitional strategy, but not usually best approach Mediation potentially offers highest satisfaction with process and outcomes Use arbitration when mediation fails

11-25