CHAPTER FOUR

CONFLICT AND CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

4. INTRODUCTION
This chapter examines conflict, the conflict process, and ways to effectively handle conflict.
One of the ways to handle conflict is through negotiation and bargaining.
4.1 MEANING AND NATURE OF CONFLICT
A. Definition. There are many definitions for conflict. But there are three common themes:
1. Perception. Conflict must be perceived by the parties to it, if no one is aware of a conflict, then
generally it is agreed that no conflict exists.
2. Incompatibility. The parties must be in opposition or have incompatible goals or desires in order
for conflict to exist.
3. Interaction. In order for there to be conflict, the parties must be able to interact with each other.
B. The Authors’ Definition: conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives another
party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affects, something that the first party cares
about.
1. Broadness. This definition is purposely kept broad to encompass the wide range of conflict that
people experience in organizations: incompatibility of goals, differences over interpretations of
facts, and disagreements based on behavioral expectations.
2. Process. The heart of this definition employs the term “process” to denote that conflict should
be viewed not as an isolated event, but as an ongoing activity with causes, motivations, and
resolutions.
3. Flexibility. This definition is flexible enough to cover the full range of conflict levels, from overt
and violent acts to subtle forms of disagreement.
4.2 TRANSITIONS IN CONFLICT THOUGHT
There are three schools of thought relating to conflict in organizations. These have developed
historically from the view that all conflict in organizations is inherently bad (the traditional view)
through the idea that conflict is natural and inevitable (the human relations view) to the most
recent idea that conflict is absolutely necessary for groups to perform effectively (the inter-
actionist view).

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 1

A. The Traditional View. In the earliest approach (1930s through 1940s) to conflict in
organizations, it was assumed that all conflict was harmful and needed to be avoided. Conflict
was seen as 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. This somewhat simplistic view of conflict allowed for relatively easy solutions:
seek out the sources of conflict and correct those malfunctions. While still commonly held in the
workplace, this view is not aligned with modern research findings.
B. The Human Relations View. This view dominated conflict theory from the late 1940s to the
mid-1970s. The belief was that conflict is a natural occurrence in all groups and organizations
and as such, should be accepted rather than removed. Proponents claimed that conflict may even
benefit a group’s performance.
C. The Inter-actionist View. This most recent view of conflict moves beyond accepting conflict in
groups and organizations to actively encouraging it. It is believed that encouraging group
leaders to maintain an ongoing minimum level of conflict keeps groups viable, self-critical, and
creative. Not all conflict is to be encouraged however, there are two main categories:
1. Functional Conflict. These are conflicts that support the goals of the group and improve its
performance: it is constructive.
2. Dysfunctional Conflict. These are conflicts that hinder group performance: it is destructive.
4.3 ASSESSING CONFLICT (TYPES OF CONFLICT)
In order to determine if conflict is functional or dysfunctional, managers must examine the type
(or relevant types) of conflict in the situation.
a. Task Conflict. This type of conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. High levels of
task conflict become dysfunctional when they create uncertainty about task roles; increase the
time needed to complete tasks; or lead to members working at cross-purposes. Low-to-moderate
levels of task conflict are functional as they consistently demonstrate a positive effect on group
performance.
b. Relationship Conflict. This type of conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships. Almost all
conflict of this type is dysfunctional.
c. Process Conflict. This final type of conflict relates to how the work is accomplished. Low
levels of process conflict are functional, while moderate-to-high levels of process conflict are
dysfunctional.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 2

4.4 CAUSES OF CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATIONS
Conflict is pervasive in organizations. To manage it effectively, managers should understand the
many sources of conflict. They can be classified into two broad categories: structural factors,
which stem from the nature of the organization and the way in which work is organized and
personal factors, which arise from differences among individuals. Figure 5.1 summarizes the
causes of conflict within each category.
Structural Factors Personal Factors
• Specialization • Skills and abilities

• Interdependent • Personalities
• Common resources • Perception
• Goal differences Conflict • Values and ethics
• Authority • Emotions
relationships • Communication
• Jurisdictional varies
ambiguities
• Cultural differences

Figure 5.1 Causes of Conflict in Organizations

4.4.1 STRUCTURAL FACTORS
The causes of conflict related to the organization's structure include specialization,
interdependence, common resources, goal differences, authority relationships, status
inconsistencies, and jurisdictional ambiguities.
Specialization: When jobs are highly specialized, employees become experts at certain tasks. For
example, at one software company, there is one specialist for databases, one for statistical
packages, and another for expert systems. Highly specialized jobs can lead to conflict, because
people have little awareness of the tasks that others perform.
A classic conflict of specialization is one between salespeople and engineers. Engineers are
technical specialists responsible for product design and quality. Salespeople are marketing
experts and liaisons with customers.
Salespeople are often accused of making delivery promises to customers that engineers cannot
keep because the sales force lacks the technical knowledge necessary to develop realistic
delivery deadlines.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 3

Interdependence: Work that is interdependent requires groups or individuals to depend on one
another to accomplish goals. Depending on other people to get work done is fine when the
process works smoothly. However, when there is a problem, it becomes very easy to blame the
other party, and conflict escalates.
In a garment manufacturing plant, for example, when the fabric cutters get behind in their work,
the workers who sew the garments are delayed as well. Considerable frustration may result when
the workers at the sewing machines feel their efforts are being blocked by the cutters slow pace.
Common Resources: Any time multiple parties must share resources, there is potential for
conflict. This potential is enhanced when the shared resources become scarce. One resource
often shared by managers is secretarial support. It is not uncommon for a secretary to support ten
or more managers, each of whom believes his or her work is most important. This puts pressure
on the secretaries and leads to potential conflicts in prioritizing and scheduling work.
Goal Differences: When work groups have different goals, these goals may be incompatible. For
example, in one cable television Company, the salesperson's goal was to sell as many new
installations as possible. This created problems for the service department, because its goal was
timely installations. With increasing sales, the service department's work load became backed up,
and orders were delayed. Often these types of conflicts occur because individuals do not have
knowledge of another department's objectives.
Authority Relationships
The nature of a traditional boss-employee relationship brings to mind a vision of a hierarchy or
of a boss who is superior to the employee. For many employees, this relationship is not a
comfortable one, because another individual has the right to tell them what to do. Some people
resent authority more than others, and obviously this creates conflicts. In addition, some bosses
are more autocratic than others; this compounds the potential for conflict in the relationship. As
organizations move toward the team approach and empowerment, there should be less potential
for conflict from authority relationships.
Status Inconsistencies
Some organizations have a strong status difference between management and non management
workers. Managers may enjoy privileges such as flexible schedules, personal telephone calls at
work, and longer lunch hours that are not available to non management employees. This may
result in resentment and conflict.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 4

Jurisdictional Ambiguities: Have you ever telephoned a company with a problem and had your
call transferred through several different people and departments? This situation illustrates
jurisdictional ambiguity that is, unclear lines of responsibility within an organization. When a
problem occurs for which there is no definite source of responsibility, workers tend to "pass the
buck," or avoid dealing with the problem. Conflicts emerge over responsibility for the problem.
The factors just discussed are structural in that they arise from the ways in which work is
organized. Other conflicts come from differences among individuals.
4.4.2 PERSONAL FACTORS
The causes of conflict that arise from individual differences include skills and abilities,
personalities, perceptions, values and ethics, emotions and communication barriers.
Skills and Abilities: The work force is composed of individuals with varying levels of skills and
ability. Diversity in skills and abilities may be positive for the organization, but it also holds
potential for conflict, especially when jobs are interdependent. Experienced, competent workers
may find it difficult to work alongside new and unskilled recruits. Workers can become resentful
when their new boss, fresh from college, knows a lot about managing people but is unfamiliar
with the technology with which they are working.
Personalities: Individuals do not leave their personalities at the doorstep when they enter the
workplace. Personality conflicts are realities in organizations. To expect that you will like all of
your coworkers may be a naive expectation, as would be the expectation that they will all like
you.
One personality trait that many people find difficult to deal with is abrasiveness. An abrasive
person is one who ignores the interpersonal aspects of work and the feelings of colleagues.
Abrasive individuals are often achievement oriented and hardworking, but their perfectionist,
critical style often leaves others feeling unimportant. This style creates stress and strain for those
around the abrasive person.
Perceptions: Differences in perception can also lead to conflict. One area in which perceptions
can differ is the perception of what motivates employees. If managers and workers do not have a
shared perception of what motivates people, the reward system can create conflicts. Managers
usually provide what they think employees want rather than what employees really want.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 5

 Values and Ethics: Differences in values and ethics can be sources of disagreement. Older
workers, for example, value company loyalty and probably would not take a sick day when they
were not really ill. Younger workers, valuing mobility, like the concept of "mental health days,"
or calling in sick to get away from work. This may not be true for all workers, but it illustrates
that differences in values can lead to conflict.
Most people have their own sets of values and ethics. The extent to which they apply these ethics
in the workplace varies. Some people have strong desires for approval from others and will work
to meet others' ethical standards. Some people are relatively unconcerned with approval from
others and strongly apply their own ethical standards. Still others operate seemingly without
regard to ethics or values.'' When conflicts over values or ethics do arise, heated disagreement is
common because of the personal nature of the differences.
Emotions: The moods of others can be a source of conflict in the workplace. Problems at home
often spill over into the work arena, and he related moods can be hard for others to deal with.
Communication Barriers: Communication barriers such as physical separation and language can
create distortions in messages, and these can lead to conflict. Another communication barrier is
value judgment, in which a listener assigns a worth to a message before it is received. For
example, suppose a team member is chronic complainer. When this individual enters the
manager’s office, the manager is likely to devalue the message before it is even delivered.
Conflict can then emerge. Many other communication barriers can lead to conflict.
4.5 THE CONFLICT PROCESS
There are five stages in the conflict process.
Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility. This indicates the presence of conditions
that create opportunities for conflict to arise. These conditions do not need to directly lead to
conflict, but one of these causes is necessary for conflict to surface. There are three general
categories of these causes or sources of conflict.
1. Communication. This source of conflict arises from barriers to communication such as semantic
difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise” in the communication channels.
Semantic difficulties may be the result of differences in training, selective perception, and
inadequate information about others. The choice of communication channel, the filtering process,
and the divergence of communications from formal channels all increase the likelihood of
conflict.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 6

a. The potential for conflict increases when:
1) Communication barriers exist.
2) Too little or too much communication takes place.
2. Structure. This includes variables such as size, degree of specialization in the tasks assigned to
group members, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibly, leadership styles, reward
systems, and the degree of dependence between groups.
a. The potential for conflict increases when:
1) Groups are larger or more specialized.
2) Group members are younger.
3) Turnover is high.
4) A “close” style of leadership (high control over members’ behaviors and close observation of the
members by the leader) is used.
5) There is too much reliance on participation in the group.
6) Reward systems are designed so that one member gains at another's expense.
7) The group is dependent upon another group.
8) One group can gain at another group’s expense.
3. Personal Variables. Personality types, values (including cultural values), and emotions can lead
to conflict.
a. The potential for conflict increases when:
1) Conflict-oriented personality types, such as highly authoritarian or dogmatic personalities, exist
in the work group.
2) There exist differences in values among the group members or between group members and
leaders.
3) Members are highly emotional in the work environment (no matter what the cause of those
emotions might be).
Stage II: Cognition and Personalization. If the antecedent conditions of the first stage
negatively affect something one party cares about, then the potential for conflict becomes
actualized in the second stage. One party must be aware of this antecedent condition in order for
the conflict to become actualized (“perceived” conflict).

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 7

 Merely being perceived does not make conflict personalized. It is when individuals become
emotionally involved, that conflict becomes personalized and the parties experience anxiety,
tension, frustration, or hostility. This is known as “felt” conflict.
Stage III: Intentions. Intentions are decisions to act in a given way. People's perceptions and
emotions are focused by their intentions into their overt behavior. But behavior does not always
accurately reflect a person's intentions. Because one party must infer the other party’s intent in
order to know how to respond, intentions are critical in the management of conflict. Many
conflicts become escalated because one party attributes the wrong intentions to the other party.
The Primary Conflict-Handling Intentions
The two dimensions are; cooperativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the
other party’s concerns) and assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his
or her own concerns) to understand the five basic conflict-handling intentions.
a. Competing. Assertive and uncooperative intentions exhibited when a person strives to achieve
his or her goal at the expense of the other party.
b. Collaborating. Assertive and cooperative intentions in which a person tries to find a “win-win”
solution that makes both parties happy.
c. Avoiding. Unassertive and uncooperative intentions evidenced by attempts to avoid conflict
based on the hope it will go away.
d. Accommodating. Unassertive and cooperative intentions shown when someone “caves in” to
please another.
e. Compromising. Midrange on both intentional scales, this person acts to ensure that neither party
wins nor loses.
Use of Intentional Strategies: While many people have a preferred strategy when dealing with
conflict, the intentional approach will often vary by the situation.
Stage IV: Behavior. This is the visible stage of conflict. It includes statements, actions, and
reactions made by the conflicting parties. These behaviors are usually overt attempts to
implement each party's intentions. The conflict behaviors themselves act as a stimulus to the
other party, often in unintended ways.
1. Functional Conflicts. Conflicts can be functional when confined to the lower range of the
conflict continuum: characterized by subtle, indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 8

2. Dysfunctional Conflicts. Conflicts become dysfunctional when they move to the upper range of
the conflict continuum, which includes highly destructive activities such as strikes and riots.
Stage V: Outcomes. The behaviors given under Stage IV result in consequences, i.e., functional
or dysfunctional outcomes
Functional Outcomes: Normally associated with low-to-moderate levels of task and process
conflict, these outcomes result in an improvement in the group's performance.
a. Functional Outcome Indicators. Conflicts can be considered to have functional outcomes when
any of the following end-conditions exist:
1) The quality of decisions is improved by allowing multiple points of view to be considered.
2) Creativity and innovation are stimulated by challenging the status quo.
3) Interest and curiosity among group members is encouraged.
4) Problems are aired and tensions are released.
5) An environment of self-evaluation and change is created.
b. Research Results. Studies in diverse settings confirm the functionality of conflict and its ability
to increase group performance. Additionally, heterogeneous groups (those with a greater
likelihood for conflict than homogenous groups) were also found to produce higher-quality
solutions.
Dysfunctional Outcomes: Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve
common ties, and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.
a. Dysfunctional Outcome Indicators.
1) Group effectiveness is reduced.
2) Group communication is retarded.
3) Group cohesiveness is reduced.
4) Group goals are subordinated to infighting among members.
5) The group is threatened with destruction.
b. Research Results. A substantial body of the literature has shown dysfunctional conflict to reduce
group effectiveness.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 9

 4.6 CREATING FUNCTIONAL CONFLICT (CONFLICT STIMULATION)
If the inter-actionist view of conflict is accepted, what can be done to encourage functional
conflict in organizations? This is not an easy goal to achieve. There is a prevalent culture in
American business that still holds to the traditional view of conflict and those managers who
have succeeded often have learned to avoid conflict. This is a dangerous culture for
organizations in today's dynamic environment. Methods for creating functional conflict include:
a. Reward Systems. Functional conflict can be created when organizations reward dissent and
punish conflict avoiders.
b. Accepting Bad News. Managers must learn to take bad news without sending verbal and
nonverbal cues that conflict is unacceptable.
c. Building Formal Systems. Organizations that desire functional conflict can often build systems
that encourage dissension (e.g., formal positions for “devil’s advocates”).
4.7 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
I. NEGOTIATION
Negotiation is often the means to resolve conflict. Negotiation is becoming far more common at
all levels: it has been said that life itself is a series of small negotiations.
A. Definition: negotiation is a process in which two or more parties exchange goods or services and
attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them. It is synonymous with bargaining.
B. Bargaining Strategies. There are two general approaches to negotiation: distributive bargaining
and integrative bargaining.
1. Distributive Bargaining. This type of bargaining operates under zero-sum (or “fixed pie”)
conditions: one party’s gains reflect losses by the other.
a. Distributive Bargaining Zones. This model reflects zero-sum distributive bargaining positions.
Each party is a negotiator.
1) Each has a unique target point (what he or she would like to achieve) and resistance point (the
lowest acceptable outcome before negotiations are broken off).
2) The area between each negotiator’s target and resistance points is that negotiator’s aspiration
range. If the two ranges overlap, this common area is referred to as the settlement range.
Existence of a settlement range indicates the possibility of a successful negotiation.
3) If there is no settlement range, the negotiations cannot be satisfactorily completed.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 10

4) The goal for both negotiators is to move the final settlement point as close to his or her target
point as possible within the settlement range.
b. Distributive Bargaining Tactics.
1) Persuade the opponent of the impossibility of getting to his or her target point and the
advisability of accepting a settlement near yours.
2) Arguing that your target point is fair, while your opponent’s is not.
3) Attempting to get the opponent to feel emotionally generous toward you and thus accept an
outcome close to your target point.
2. Integrative Bargaining. This type of bargaining operates under the assumption that one or more
settlements can create a win-win solution. In order to bargain integratively, the organizations
(or individual’s) true interests must be disclosed to the other party, which requires a certain
amount of trust. Additionally, both parties must be aware of the other party's interests and
sensitive to their needs. Because of these requirements, integrative bargaining is not as common
in business as perhaps it should be.
C. Negotiation Process. This simplified model of the negotiation process is composed of five
steps.
1. Step One: Preparation and Planning. Negotiators must prepare for the conflict by:
a. Research. Negotiators must research to determine the nature of the conflict, the history behind
the conflict, and who the other negotiators are as well as their perceptions of the conflict.
b. Internal Assessment. Negotiators must be aware of what their own goals are before starting
negotiations. It is often helpful to develop a range of acceptable outcomes and commit these to
writing.
c. External Assessment. Negotiators must assess what they believe the other party's goals to be and
what negotiating positions they may take. Knowing what the opponent may ask for prior to
negotiations allows a negotiator time to develop strong factual counter-arguments.
d. Determine Strategic Limits. An important consideration in any negotiation is to determine the
best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) for both the negotiator and the opponent.
This is similar in concept to a resistance point: the negotiator must determine when it is better
strategically to cease negotiations and accept some other alternative. One possible negotiation
strategy is to get the opponent to modify his or her BATNA to increase the settlement range.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 11

2. Step Two: Definition of Ground Rules. In this initial stage of negotiations, the methodology of
the negotiation itself is determined. The step determines who, what, when, and how of the
negotiation process. The initial proposals or demands will be exchanged between the parties.
3. Step Three: Clarification and Justification. In this step each party will explain, amplify, clarify,
bolster, and justify the original demands or proposals. This step should be more explanatory in
nature, rather than confrontational; it should be used to build understanding between the parties.
4. Step Four: Bargaining and Problem Solving. This step is what is typically thought of as
negotiations. It is the actual give-and-take necessary to accomplish agreement. It is likely that
both parties will have to make some concessions in order to reach agreement.
5. Step Five: Closure and Implementation. The final step in the process is formalizing the
negotiated agreement and developing any necessary procedures for implementing and
monitoring that agreement. This step can be accomplished by anything from creating a formal
contract through simply shaking hands on it.
4.8 IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS
A. Managing Conflict. While this chapter has shown that conflict can be helpful in increasing
organizational outcomes, managers may be faced with excessive conflict and need to reduce it.
These are some guidelines for handling conflict (Conflict resolution mechanisms):
1. Competition. Use this method when:
a. Quick, decisive action is vital (emergencies).
b. Deciding important issues for which unpopular actions need to be implemented (such as cost
cutting and discipline).
c. Deciding issues vital to the organization's welfare when you know you are right and your
opponents are wrong.
d. Negotiating with people who take advantage of noncompetitive behavior.
2. Collaboration. Use this method when:
a. There is a need to find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important to be
compromised.
b. Your objective is to learn.
c. The desire is to merge insights from people with different perspectives.
d. Wishing to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus.
e. Working through feelings that interfered with the relationship.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 12

3. Avoidance. Use this method when:
a. The issue is trivial, or when issues that are more important are pressing.
b. You perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns.
c. The potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution.
d. You desire to let people cool down and regain perspective.
e. Gathering information supersedes the need for an immediate decision.
f. Others can resolve the conflict more effectively.
g. Issues seem tangential or symptomatic of other issues.
4. Accommodation. Use this method when:
a. You find you are wrong and wish to allow a better position to be heard in order to learn and to
show your reasonableness.
b. Issues are more important to others than to yourself and you wish to satisfy others and maintain
cooperation.
c. You wish to build social credits for later issues.
d. You desire to minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing.
e. Harmony and stability are especially important.
f. You wish to allow subordinates to develop by learning from their mistakes.
5. Compromise. Use this method when:
a. Goals are important but not worth the potential disruption caused by approaches that are more
assertive.
b. Opponents have power equal to yours and they are committed to mutually exclusive goals.
c. Desiring to achieve temporary settlements to complex issues.
d. Wishing to arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure.
e. Needing a backup when collaboration or competition is unsuccessful.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 13

B. Improving Negotiation Skills. The following recommendations should improve your
effectiveness in negotiating:
1. Set Ambitious Goals. Make an aggressive first offer.
2. Pay Little Attention to Initial Offers. Stick to your goals.
3. Research Your Opponent. This knowledge will help you better understand your opponent's
behavior, predict responses to your offers, and help you frame solutions in terms of your
opponent's interests.
4. Assess the Problem, Not Personalities. Concentrate on the negotiation issues not on the personal
characteristics of your opponent: separate the people from the problem.
5. Be Creative and Emphasize Win-Win Solutions. If conditions are supportive, look for an
integrative solution. Try to “invent” options that may make both parties happy.

ASTU, SoHSS, SSU, LCM (SOS372) Lecture notes, Chapter - 5 Page 14