Robbins, Judge, and Vohra

Organizational Behavior
14th Edition

Process
Process of
of Conflict
Conflict
Kelli J. Schutte
William Jewell College
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-1

Transitions
Transitions in
in Conflict
Conflict Thought
Thought
Traditional View of Conflict
The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be avoided
Prevalent view in the 1930s-1940s

Conflict resulted from:

Poor communication
Lack of openness
Failure to respond to employee needs
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-2

Continued
Continued Transitions
Transitions in
in Conflict
Conflict
Thought
Thought
Resolution Focused View of Conflict
The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome in
any group
Focuses on productive conflict resolution

Interactionist View of Conflict

The belief that conflict is not only a positive force in a group
but that it is absolutely necessary for a group to perform
effectively
Current view

Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd

Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-3

Forms
Forms of
of Interactionist
Interactionist Conflict
Conflict

Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd

Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-4

Types
Types of
of Interactionist
Interactionist Conflict
Conflict
Task Conflict
Conflicts over content and goals of the work
Low-to-moderate levels of this type are
FUNCTIONAL

Relationship Conflict
Conflict based on interpersonal relationships
Almost always DYSFUNCTIONAL

Process Conflict
Conflict over how work gets done
Low levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-5

The
The Conflict
Conflict Process
Process
We will focus on each step in a moment

E X H I B I T 14-1
E X H I B I T 14-1
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-6

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

Communication

Semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, over communication and

noise

Structure

Size and specialization of jobs

Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity
Member/goal incompatibility
Leadership styles (close or participative)
Reward systems (win-lose)
Dependence/interdependence of groups

Personal Variables
Differing individual value systems
Personality types
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-7

Stage
Stage II:
II: Cognition
Cognition and
and
Personalization
Personalization
Important stage for two reasons:
1. Conflict is defined
Perceived Conflict
Awareness by one or more parties of the existence of
conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise

2. Emotions are expressed that have a strong impact on the

eventual outcome
Felt Conflict
Emotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety,
tenseness, frustration, or hostility

Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd

Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-8

Stage
Stage III:
III: Intentions
Intentions
Intentions
Decisions to act in a given way
Note: behavior does not always accurately reflect intent

Dimensions of conflict-handling intentions:

Cooperativeness
Attempting to satisfy
the other partys
concerns

Assertiveness
Attempting to satisfy
ones own concerns
Source: K. Thomas, Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations, in M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., vol. 3 (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992), p. 668. Arrows added. Used with permission.

E X H I B I T 14-2
E X H I B I T 14-2
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-9

 Accommodating
Accommodation involves having to deal with the problem
with an element of self-sacrifice; an individual sets aside
his own concerns to maintain peace in the situation. Thus,
the person yields to what the other wants, displaying a
form of selflessness. It might come as an immediate
solution to the issue; however it also brings about a false
manner of dealing with the problem. This can be disruptive
if there is a need to come up with a more sound and
creative way out of the problem. This behavior will be
most efficient if the individual is in the wrong as it can
come as a form of conciliation.
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.
publishing as Prentice Hall

14-10

 Avoiding
In this approach, there is withdrawal from the conflict. The
problem is being dealt with through a passive attitude.
Avoiding is mostly used when the perceived negative end
outweighs the positive outcome. In employing this,
individuals end up ignoring the problem, thinking that the
conflict will resolve itself. It might be applicable in certain
situations but not in all. Avoidance would mean that you
neglect the responsibility that comes with it. The other
individuals involved might think that you are neglecting
the problem. Thus, it is better to confront the problem
before it gets worse.
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.
publishing as Prentice Hall

14-11

 Collaborating
Collaborating aims to find a solution to the conflict through
cooperating with other parties involved. Hence,
communication is an important part of this strategy. In this
mechanism, effort is exerted in digging into the issue to
identify the needs of the individuals concerned without
removing their respective interests from the picture.
Collaborating individuals aim to come up with a successful
resolution creatively, without compromising their own
satisfactions.

Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.

publishing as Prentice Hall

14-12

 Competing
Competition involves authoritative and assertive behaviors. In
this style, the aggressive individual aims to instil pressure
on the other parties to achieve a goal. It includes the use of
whatever means to attain what the individual thinks is
right. It may be appropriate in some situations but it
shouldnt come to a point wherein the aggressor becomes
too unreasonable. Dealing with the conflict with an open
mind is vital for a resolution to be met.

Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.

publishing as Prentice Hall

14-13

 Compromising
\Compromising is about coming up with a resolution that
would be acceptable to the parties involved. Thus, one
party is willing to sacrifice their own sets of goals as long
as the others will do the same. Hence, it can be viewed as a
mutual give-and-take scenario where the parties submit the
same amount of investment for the problem to be solved. A
disadvantage of this strategy is the fact that since these
parties find an easy way around the problem, the
possibility of coming up with more creative ways for a
solution would be neglected.

Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.

publishing as Prentice Hall

14-14

Stage
Stage IV:
IV: Behavior
Behavior
Conflict Management
The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve
the desired level of conflict

Conflict-Intensity Continuum

Source: Based on S.P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 93
97; and F. Glasi, The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of Third Parties, in G.B.J. Bomers and R. Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management
and Industrial Relations (Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982), pp. 11940.

E X H I B I T 14-3
E X H I B I T 14-3
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-15

Conflict
Conflict Management
Management Techniques
Techniques
Conflict Resolution
Techniques
Problem solving
Superordinate goals
Expansion of resources
Avoidance
Smoothing
Compromise
Authoritative command
Altering the human
variable
Altering the structural
variables

Conflict Stimulation
Techniques
Bringing in outsiders
Communication
Restructuring the
organization
Appointing a devils
advocate

Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp.
5989

SEE E X H I B I T 14-4
SEE E X H I B I T 14-4
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-16

Stage
Stage V:
V: Outcomes
Outcomes
Functional
Increased group
performance
Improved quality of
decisions
Stimulation of creativity
and innovation
Encouragement of interest
and curiosity
Provision of a medium for
problem solving
Creation of an environment
for self-evaluation and
change
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

Dysfunctional
Development of discontent
Reduced group
effectiveness
Retarded communication
Reduced group
cohesiveness
Infighting among group
members overcomes group
goals

Managing Functional
Conflict
Reward dissent and punish
conflict avoiders
14-17

Negotiation
Negotiation
Negotiation (Bargaining)
A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them

Two General Approaches:

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

Integrative Bargaining
Negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create
a win-win solution

Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd

Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-18

Distributive
Distributive versus
versus Integrative
Integrative
Bargaining
Bargaining

Bargaining Characteristic

Distributive
Bargaining

Integrative Bargaining

Goal

Get all the pie you can

Expand the pie

Motivation

Win-Lose

Win-Win

Focus

Positions

Interests

Information Sharing

Low

High

Duration of Relationships

Short-Term

Long-Term

Source: Based on R. J. Lewicki and J. A.

Litterer, Negotiation (Homewood, IL: Irwin,
1985), p. 280.

Integrative

Distributive
SEE E X H I B I T 14-5
SEE E X H I B I T 14-5
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-19

The
The Negotiation
Negotiation Process
Process
BATNA
The Best Alternative
To a Negotiated
Agreement
The lowest acceptable
value (outcome) to an
individual for a
negotiated agreement

E X H I B I T 14-7
E X H I B I T 14-7
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-20

Individual
Individual Differences
Differences in
in Negotiation
Negotiation
Effectiveness
Effectiveness

Personality Traits

Extroverts and agreeable people are weaker at distributive

negotiation; disagreeable introverts are best
Intelligence is a weak indicator of effectiveness

Mood and Emotion

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

Gender
Men and women negotiate the same way, but may
experience different outcomes

Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd

Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-21

Third-Party
Third-Party Negotiations
Negotiations
Four Basic Third-Party Roles
Mediator
A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using
reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions for alternatives

Arbitrator
A third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an
agreement.

Conciliator
A trusted third party who provides an informal communication
link between the negotiator and the opponent

Consultant
An impartial third party, skilled in conflict management, who
attempts to facilitate creative problem solving through
communication and analysis
Copyright 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational
Behavior, 14e

14-22