Conflict As A Dualistic Social Phenomenon
Conflict As A Dualistic Social Phenomenon
Musah Ibrahim
National Development Planning Commission
Development Policy Division
[email protected]
Theoretical Compilation
March 2018
c
CONFLICT: A DUALISTIC SOCIAL PHENOMENON IN ORGANISATIONS
INTRODUCTION
Conflicts arise from both systemic and individual perceptions. Therefore, a lasting
resolution for any conflict requires both systemic and individual analysis and
intervention. Conflict resolution and peace building thus call for a collaborative approach
that addresses both of these levels. The parties to the conflict are the experts in defining
their needs and how to satisfy them. The role of a third party is to assist parties in
identifying and understanding those needs and values when negotiations have
deadlocked. Imposing outside resolution may provide temporary relief, but a lasting
arrangement can only be designed and implemented by the parties themselves (Abu-
Nimer, 2003).
DEFINING CONFLICT
people who perceive incompatible goals and interference from each other in achieving
these goals”. Thomas (2005) defines conflict as a “disagreement in opinions between
people or groups, due to differences in attitudes, beliefs, values or needs. Brandon and
Robertson (2007) claim people tend to incorrectly perceive conflict as negative and use
the word “conflict” to label situations that are not really conflicts. Cahn and Abigail (2007)
also clarified that conflict is often incorrectly perceived as a disruption of the normal
function of society. George Simmel (1955) meted out an incisive definition, adding that
“conflict as designed to resolve divergent dualisms is a way of achieving some kind of
unity, even if it will be through the annihilation of one of the conflicting parties”.
Folger, Scott, Poole and Stutman (2005,) define conflict as “The interaction of
interdependent people who perceive incompatibility and the possibility of interference
from others as a result of this incompatibility”. Tillett and French (2006) define conflict as
“when two or more people perceive that their values or needs are incompatible”. Cahn
and Abigail (2007) give a more differentiated definition of conflict, saying it exists when
there is a problematic situation, differing perceptions and desired outcomes,
interdependence, potential to adversely affect the relationship if unaddressed and a sense
of urgency. Masters and Albright (2002) posit that conflict exists when it is felt by
psychologically by at least one of the parties, that interdependence is a core aspect of
conflict and that conflict can be either real or perceived. What seems unequivocal about
the explanations and definitions above give succinct impression and comprehension on
how erroneous it is for conflict to be viewed solely as something negative.
CONFLICT IN ORGANISATIONS
conflict. Russell and Peppers (2004) assert conflicts occur when the needs and goals of the
individual are not in harmony with the needs and goals of the organization.
Conflict situations are an important aspect of the workplace. A conflict is a situation when
the interests, needs, goals or values of involved parties interfere with one another. A
conflict is a common phenomenon in the workplace. Different stakeholders may have
different priorities; conflicts may involve team members, departments, projects,
organization and client, boss and subordinate, organization needs vs. personal needs.
Often, a conflict is a result of perception. Is conflict a bad thing? Not necessarily. Often, a
CONFLICT: A DUALISTIC SOCIAL PHENOMENON IN ORGANISATIONS
DUALISMS OF CONFLICT
are to survive and adapt. Organizational change and innovation does not just happen; it
requires a stimulant. That stimulant is conflict.
Conflict that results into healthy competition cultivates innovation and inventiveness
amongst employees. In times of conflict, there is a high sense of necessity that results into
the emergence of divergent viewpoints amongst employees. It is imperative among the
employees to develop new strategies and ways of conducting business in order to keep
up with internal competition from their colleagues. In instances where conflicting parties
engage in extreme disagreement, sub-optimization may result. When conflicting parties
push the pursuit of their own interest excessively, the organizations goals end up
compromised. Instead of working together to achieve the organization's goals, conflicting
parties engage in needless feuds that result in superiority contests. Distortion of goals
occurs as parties embark on undermining each other's efforts (Adams 2013).
O'Connell (2014), has tabled down positive aspects of conflict he believes cannot be
oversighted. According to him, conflict contributes to social change ensuring both
interpersonal and intergroup dynamics remain fresh and reflective of current interests
CONFLICT: A DUALISTIC SOCIAL PHENOMENON IN ORGANISATIONS
and realities. He further asserted that, conflict serves to “discourage premature group
decision making,” forcing participants in the decision making process to explore the
issues and interests at stake. He clarified that conflict allows for the reconciliation of the
parties’ concerns, which can lead to an agreement benefiting both parties’ needs, and
often their relationship and organizations. He finally contended that, conflict strengthens
intragroup unity by providing an outlet for group members to discuss and negotiate their
interests within the group. Without intragroup conflict, the health of the group typically
declines.
Adams (2013), posits that, businesses may lose precious time and resources at times of
conflict. Instead of concentrating on meeting their objectives, employees waste time on
divisive issues. Misuse of business materials and funds is quite rampant when conflicting
parties engage in "warfare." Wrangles, stress and emotional confrontations reduce the
workers' productivity, and eventually, the profitability of the business.
Conflict can distract individuals and groups from their primary purposes, leaving them
with less time and resources for other activities. When conflict involves the use of “heavy
contentious tactics,” it can cause the individuals or groups involved in the conflict as well
as individuals or groups not involved in the conflict to divert time and resources away
from other needs. Conflict can have both short term and long term effects on the physical
and psychological health of the individuals involved in or affected by the conflict. In
worst case scenarios the psychological consequences can include deep trauma and
diminished coping mechanisms. Conflict can lead to “collective traumas,” which lead to
“chosen trauma” and can be transmitted to future generations in the form of resentment
against one’s ancestors’ enemies. Chosen trauma gives rise to group identity and keeps
the flame of conflict burning (O'Connell 2014).
According to Lohrey (2015), daily operational goals can become more difficult to achieve
as a conflict situation decreases both morale and productivity. Doug Hovatter, an
CONFLICT: A DUALISTIC SOCIAL PHENOMENON IN ORGANISATIONS
associate professor at West Virginia University, says that ongoing conflict can affect the
company culture as it creates an environment of hostility, suspicion and distrust. Job
satisfaction, productivity and your employees' commitment to the company can decrease
as the negative effect on the overall company culture increases. He further clarifies that,
unhealthy competition, or situations in which employees try to one-up each other at your
company’s expense, may occur as clashing employees try to prove their own solution is
the best way to proceed. Teamwork and team spirit can suffer as employees refuse to
help one another for fear of being outdone and each works to bring the other down.
Backstabbing, sabotage and open hostility are common results.
CONCLUSION
The potential for conflict to produce both positive and negative results closely mirrors
our individual perspectives regarding conflict and can be mapped along a continuum
from a positive or benefit-centric perspective on one end to a negative or cost-centric
perspective on the other. Research suggests that an individual’s perspective regarding
conflict strongly impacts their ability to effectively address it. As our perspective of
conflict charts our path for engaging and navigating our differences, our view of conflict
must be balanced, realistic, and flexible. Such a perspective recognizes that conflict is a
normal, natural aspect of human interaction that inevitably manifests to varying degrees
in almost everyone’s life. The perspective also understands that, though conflict has
potential costs, it does not have to be negative or destructive. When properly understood
and addressed constructively, conflict can be managed in a way that minimizes its
potential, but not inevitable, negative impacts (O'Connell 2014).
REFERENCES
Abu-Nimer, Mohammed. Nonviolence and Peace Building in Islam: Theory and Practice,
Gainesville, University of Florida Press, 2003.
Brandon, M. & Robertson, L. (2007). Conflict and dispute resolution. Melbourne, Australia:
Oxford University Press.
Cahn, D. & Abigail, R. (2007). Managing conflict through communication. Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Folger, J., Scott Poole, M. & Stutman, R. (2005). Working through conflict. Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Masters, M. & Albright, R. (2002). The complete guide to conflict resolution in the
workplace. New York, NY: American Management Association.
CONFLICT: A DUALISTIC SOCIAL PHENOMENON IN ORGANISATIONS
Mcshane, S.L & Glinow, M.A. (2008). Organizational Behaviour. New York: McGraw –
Hill Companies.
Tillett, G. & French, B. (2006). Resolving Conflict. Australia: Oxford University Press.