Chapter 14: Conflict and Negotiation

• A process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about

– That point in an ongoing activity when an interaction “crosses over” to become an interparty conflict

• Encompasses a wide range of conflicts that people experience in organizations– Incompatibility of goals– Differences over interpretations of facts– Disagreements based on behavioral expectations

15-2

• 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

15-3

Human Relations View of Confl ict◦ The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable

outcome in any group

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

Interactionist View of Confl ict◦ 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

15-4

Functional Confl ict◦ Conflict that supports the goals of the group and

improves its performance Task Conflict Process Conflict

Dysfunctional Confl ict◦ Conflict that hinders group performance Relationship Conflict

15-5

Task Confl ict◦ 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 Confl ict◦ Conflict over how work gets done◦ Low levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL

15-6

• Stage I: Potential Opposit ion or Incompatibi l i ty– Communication

• Semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise”

– Structure• Size and specialization of jobs• Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity• Member/goal incompatibility• Leadership styles (close or participative)• Reward systems (win-lose)• Dependence/interdependence of groups

– Personal Variables• Differing individual value systems• Personality types

15-7

• Stage II: Cognition and Personalization– Important stage for two reasons:

1.Confl ict is defined Perceived Confl ict

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 Confl ict

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

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

15-8

• Stage III: Intentions

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

• Dimensions of conflict-handling intentions:– Cooperativeness

• Attempting to satisfy the other party’sconcerns

– Assertiveness• Attempting to satisfy

one’s own concerns

15-9

• Stage III: IntentionsFive Conflict Handling Intentions Competing- assertive and uncooperative

Collaborating- assertive and cooperative

Avoiding- unassertive and uncooperative

Accommodating- unassertive and cooperative

Compromising- midrange

15-10

Conflict Management◦ The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to

achieve the desired level of conflict

Conflict-Intensity Continuum

15-11

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

variable– Altering the structural

variables– Communication

◦ Bringing in outsiders◦ Restructuring the

organization◦ Appointing a devil’s

advocate

Exhibit 15-4

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

15-12

• Functional– Increased group performance– Improved quality of decisions– Stimulation of creativity and

innovation– Encouragement of interest

and curiosity– Provision of a medium for

problem-solving– Creation of an environment

for self-evaluation and change

• Dysfunctional– Development of discontent– Reduced group effectiveness– Retarded communication– Reduced group cohesiveness– Infighting among group

members overcomes group goals

• Creating Functional Conflict– Reward dissent and punish

conflict avoiders

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

15-13

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

Bargaining Characteristic Distributive Bargaining

Integrative Bargaining

Goal Get all the pie you can

Expand the pie

Motivation Win-Lose Win-WinFocus Positions InterestsInformation Sharing Low HighDuration of Relationships Short-Term Long-Term

Distributive Tactics◦ Make an aggressive first offer◦ Reveal a deadline

Integrative Tactics◦ Bargain in teams◦ Put more issues on the table◦ Don’t compromise

15-16

BATNA◦ The Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement

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

The “Bottom Line” for negotiations

15-17

Personality Traits◦ Extroverts and agreeable people weaker at distributive

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

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

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

experience different outcomes◦ Women and men take on gender stereotypes in

negotiations: tender and tough◦ Women are less likely to negotiate

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

15-18

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.◦ Concil iator

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

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

15-19

• Conflict and Culture– Japanese and U.S. managers view conflict differently– U.S. managers more likely to use competing tactics while

Japanese managers are likely to use compromise and avoidance

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

instance:• American negotiators are more likely than Japanese bargainers to

make a first offer• North Americans use facts to persuade, Arabs use emotion, and

Russians used asserted ideals• Brazilians say “no” more often than Americans or Japanese

© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights reserved.

15-20