ORGAIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR (LW-2315)

MODULE 4 : CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

CONFLICT:

I. CONFLICT DEFINITION:
 It is the condition of objective incompatibility between values and goals, as the behaviour
of deliberately interfering with another’s goal achievement, and emotionally in terms of
hostility.

Descriptive theories have explained conflict behaviour in terms of objective conflict of

interest, personal styles, reaction to threats, and cognitive distortions. Normative
recommendations range over the establishment of superordinate goals, consciousness
raising, selection of compatible individuals and mediating conflict, (Kilman and Thomas:
Ref - Fred Luthans,p/386)

 Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively
affected, or is about to negatively affects, something that the first party cares about.
(K.W.Thomas: Ref – Stephen P. Robbins, p/395)

II. TRANSITION IN CONFLICT THOUGHT;

Role of conflict in groups and organizations has undergone changes. There are three different
views namely; Traditional view, Human Relations view and the Interactionist view.

I. Traditional View: This view was consistent with the attitudes that prevailed about group
behaviour in the 1930s and 1940s. Conflict was viewed negatively as harmful and has to
be avoided. It 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 of their employees.
II. Human Relations View; It argued that conflict was a natural occurrence in any group.
Since it is inevitable, this school advocated acceptance of conflict. This view prevailed
during late 1940s through the mid 1970s.
III. Interactionist View: This school of thought encouraged conflict on the ground that a
harmonious peaceful, tranquil and cooperative group is prone to becoming static,
apathetic, and non responsive to needs for change and innovation. It emphasized in
encouraging group leaders to maintain an ongoing minimum level of conflict.
a) Functional conflict: These are constructive forms of conflict which support the goals of
the group and improve its performance
b) Dysfunctional conflict: These are destructive forms of conflict which hinder group
group performance.
Organizational conflict refers to the condition of misunderstanding or disagreement
that is caused by the perceived or actual opposition in the needs, interests and values
among people who work together. Organizational conflict may also be termed as
workplace conflict. The conflicts occur during situations where there is an interaction
between two or more members of an organization involving contradictory opinions.

Traditional View

Early in our pursuit of management study, conflict was thought to be a dysfunctional

outcome, a result of poor communication and lack of trust between co-workers.
Conflict was associated with words like violence and destruction, and people were
encouraged to avoid it at all costs.

This was the case all the way up until the 1940s, and, if you think about it, it goes
right along with what we thought we knew about what motivated people, how they
worked together and the structure and supervision we thought we needed to provide to
ensure productivity. Because we viewed all conflict as bad, we looked to eradicate it,
usually by addressing it with the person causing it. Once addressed, group and
organization would become more productive again.

Many of us still take the traditional view—conflict is bad and we need to get rid of it
– even though evidence today tells us that’s not the case.

The Human Relations View

Since the late 1940s, our studies of organizational behavior have indicated that
conflict isn’t so thoroughly bad. We came to view it as a natural occurrence in groups,
teams and organizations. The Human Relations view suggested that, because conflict
was inevitable, we should learn to embrace it.

But they were just starting to realize, with this point of view, that conflict might
benefit a group’s performance. These views of dominated conflict theory from the late
1940s through the mid-1970s.

The Interactionist View

In the Interactionist View of conflict, we went from accepting that conflict would
exist and dealing with it to an understanding that a work group that was completely
harmonious and cooperative was prone to becoming static and non-responsive to
needs for change and innovation. So this view encouraged managers to maintain a
minimal level of conflict, a level that was enough to keep the group creative and
moving forward.

The Interactionist View is still viable today, so it’s the view we’re going to take from
here on as we discuss conflict. We know that all conflict is both good and bad,
appropriate and inappropriate, and how we rate conflict is going to depend on the type
of conflict. We’ll discuss types of conflict next.

TYPES OF CONFLICT

Conflict is classified into the following four types:

Intrapersonal conflict occurs within an individual. The experience takes place in the
person’s mind. Hence, it is a type of conflict that is psychological involving the
individual’s thoughts, values, principles and emotions. Interpersonal conflict may
come in different scales, from the simpler mundane ones like deciding whether or not
to go organic for lunch to ones that can affect major decisions such as choosing a
career path. Furthermore, this type of conflict can be quite difficult to handle if you
find it hard to decipher your inner struggles. It leads to restlessness and uneasiness, or
can even cause depression. In such occasions, it would be best to seek a way to let go
of the anxiety through communicating with other people. Eventually, when you find
yourself out of the situation, you can become more empowered as a person. Thus, the
experience evoked a positive change which will help you in your own personal
growth.

Interpersonal conflict refers to a conflict between two individuals. This occurs

typically due to how people are different from one another. We have varied
personalities which usually results to incompatible choices and opinions. Apparently,
it is a natural occurrence which can eventually help in personal growth or developing
your relationships with others. In addition, coming up with adjustments is necessary
for managing this type of conflict. However, when interpersonal conflict gets too
destructive, calling in a mediator would help so as to have it resolved.

Intra-group conflict is a type of conflict that happens among individuals within a

team. The incompatibilities and misunderstandings among these individuals lead to an
intragroup conflict. It is arises from interpersonal disagreements (e.g. team members
have different personalities which may lead to tension) or differences in views and
ideas (e.g. in a presentation, members of the team might find the notions presented by
the one presiding to be erroneous due to their differences in opinion). Within a team,
conflict can be helpful in coming up with decisions which will eventually allow them
to reach their objectives as a team. However, if the degree of conflict disrupts
harmony among the members, then some serious guidance from a different party will
be needed for it to be settled.
Intergroup conflict takes place when a misunderstanding arises among different
teams within an organization. For instance, the sales department of an organization
can come in conflict with the customer support department. This is due to the varied
sets of goals and interests of these different groups. In addition, competition also
contributes for intergroup conflict to arise. There are other factors which fuel this type
of conflict. Some of these factors may include a rivalry in resources or the boundaries
set by a group to others which establishes their own identity as a team.

Conflict may seem to be a problem to some, but this isn’t how conflict should be
perceived. On the other hand, it is an opportunity for growth and can be an effective
means of opening up among groups or individuals. However, when conflict begins to
draws back productivity and gives way to more conflicts, then conflict management
would be needed to come up with a resolution.

THE CONFLICT PROCESS: It consists of five stages namely, potential opposition or

incompatibility, cognition and personalisation, intentions, behaviour and outcomes.

Stage I - Potential Opposition or Incompatibility: Presence of conditions that creates conditions

for conflict to arise. They need not directly lead to conflict but one of the conditions is
necessary if conflict has to surface. These are Communication, structure and personal variables.

Stage II - Cognition and Personalisation : if conditions in cited above negatively affect

something that one party cares about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility
becomes actualized at this stage. The antecedent conditions can lead to conflict only when one
party or more is affected by, and aware of, the conflict. When conflict is perceived does not
mean that it is personalized. It is the felt level, when individuals become emotionally involved
and experience anxiety, tension, frustration, or hostility.

Stage III – Intentions: These intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions and their
overt behaviour. The intentions are decisions to act in a given way. Taking two dimensions –
Cooperativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concern)
and Assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concern),
the following five intentions can be identified.
A) Competing: (Assertive and uncooperative) A desire to certify one’s own interest, regardless
of the impact on the other party to the conflict.
B) Collaborating: (Assertive and cooperative) A situation in which the parties to a conflict
each desire to satisfy fully the concerns of all parties.
C) Avoiding: (Unassertiveness and uncooperative) The desire to withdraw from or suppress a
conflict.
D) Accommodating: (Unassertive and cooperative) The willingness of one party in a conflict
to place the opponent’s interests above his or her own.
E) Compromising: (midway of both assertiveness and cooperativeness) A situation in which
each party to a conflict is willing to give up something.

Stage IV – Behaviour: At this stage the conflict becomes visible. The behaviour stage includes
the statements, actions and reactions made by the conflicting parties. The behaviours are
usually overt attempt to implement each party’s intentions. But these behaviours have stimulus
quality that is separate from intentions.

Conflict –Intensity continuum

Annihilatory Conflict
 Overt efforts to destroy the other party
 Aggressive physical attacks
 Threats and ultimatums
 Assertive verbal attacks
 Overt questioning or challenging of others
 Minor disagreement or misunderstandings
No Conflict

Stage V: Outcomes: Outcomes can be functional and dysfunctional.

Functional outcome: Conflict is constructive or functional when it improves the quality of

decisions stimulates creativity and innovations, encourages interest and curiosity among group
members. Conflict is an antidote for groupthink. Conflict can also be positively related to
productivity.

Dysfunctional Outcome: Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve

common ties, and eventually leads to the destruction of the group. Consequences of conflict are
retarding of communication, reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group
goals to the primacy of infighting between members. At the extreme conflict

Conflicts can be Intra-individual, interpersonal, Intergroup, and organizational.

I. Intra-individual Conflict:
Within every individual there are usually (1) a number of competing needs and roles, (2) a
variety of different ways that drives and roles can be expressed, (3) many types of
barriers which can occur between the drive and goal, and (4) both positive and negative
aspects attached to desired goals. These complicate the human adaptation process and
often result in conflict. Intra-individual conflict can be discussed in terms of frustration,
goals, and roles.

A) Conflict due to frustration: Frustration occurs when a motivated drive is blocked

before reaching a desired goal. The barrier may be either overt (Outward, or physical)
or covert (inward or mental-sociopsychological). The following diagram explains the
frustration model of conflict.
 B) Goal Conflict: Another common source for an individual is a goal which has both
positive and negative features, or two or more competing goals. Unlike in frustration
where one motive is blocked before the goal is reached, in goal conflict two or more
motives block one another. The following are the three different forms of goal
conflict.

i) Approach – approach conflict: where the individual is motivated to approach two or

more positive but mutually exclusive goals.

ii) Approach – avoidance conflict: where the individual is motivated to approach a

goal and at the same time is motivated to avoid it. The single goal contains both
positive and negative characteristics for the individual.

iii) Avoidance – avoidance conflict: where the individual is motivated to avoid two or
more negative but mutually exclusive goals.

B) Role Conflict: Role is defined as a position that has expectations evolving from
established norms (the oughts of behaviour). Person living in the contemporary
society assumes different types of roles both outside and inside the organization. All
the roles which the individuals bring to the organization are relevant to their
behaviour, in the study of organization behaviour; the organizational role is the most
important. Thus the clash of roles often carries conflicting demands and expectation.
The classic example of an organizational role conflict is that of the first-line
supervisor.

II. Interpersonal Conflict: This is a form of conflict that can result when two or more oersons
are interacting with one another. Two popular ways of to analyse interpersonal conflict are
through transactional analysis and the Johari window.
A) Transactional Analysis: Eric Berne started the movement with his book “Games
people Play” and Thomas Harris through his book “I am OK-You’re OK” popularised
it. A major reason for its popularity, and where Freud and other psychoanalytic
theorists failed, is that it uses very understandable everyday relevant terminology.
TA uses the psychoanalytic theory of Freud (id, ego and superego) as a background
for identifying three important ego states: child, adult and parent. These three ego
stages are roughly equivalent to the Freudian concepts of id (child), ego (adult) and
superego (parent). The following are the characteristics of the different ego stages.
i) Child (C) ego state: Impulsive, submissive, confronting, insubordinate, emotional,
joyful, rebellious characterize this ego state. The child state is characterized by
immaturity behaviour of an individual.
ii) Adult (A) ego state: cool-headed, rational, analytical, fairness, objectivity are
normally the characteristics of this ego state. The adult state is characterized by
maturity behaviour of an individual.
iii) Parent (P) ego state: Domineering, protective, loving stern, critical are the
characteristics the parent state is characterized by dominating behaviour of an
individual.
Transactions between ego states: Anything that happens between people will involve a
transaction between their ego states. All transactions can be classified into three
categories as: ( 1) Complementary, (2) Crossed, and (3) Ulterior which are explained
below.
Complementary transactions: A transaction is complementary if the message sent or
the behaviour exhibited by one person’s ego state receives the appropriate and
expected response from the other person’s ego state. Three possible transactions as
given below

P P P P P P

A A A A A A

C C C C C C

Crossed transactions: A crossed transaction occurs when the message sent or the
behaviour exhibited by one person’s ego state is reacted to by an incompatible,
unexpected ego state on the part of another person.

P P

A A

C C

Ulterior transactions: The ulterior transactions always involve at least two ego states on
the part of one person. The individual may one thing (project as an adult state)indicted
by the solid line but mean quite another (parent state) indicated by dashed line below.

P P

A A

C C
REASONS OF CONFLICT

1.Vague Definition of Responsibility

In an organization, generally, all the workers have their own set of work and
responsibilities.In practical life, it is not completely applicable. Many times, there are
chances when there emerge a conflict due to some unclear facts, like who has to
complete a certain task, whom to report, superior-subordinate relationship etc.

2.Lack of Resources

There are various groups or departments in an organization. Factory gives them

a separate proportion of resources. In practical life, the departments generally end up
fighting for the appropriation of resources.

3.Interest

Undoubtedly, in every organization, there are 2 different interests which prevail.First

one is of the workers and the other is of the organization. An organization wants to
earn more and more profits, for which they are not ready to pay higher wages.

On the other hand, workers want more and more wages. These two interests are
contradicting to each other. In this present era, organizations try their level best to
match both the needs.

4.Inter-personal Relations

Human is a social animal having his/her own region, religion, preferences, way of
working, etc.Though this diversity in the workforce brings creativity in the work, it
also leads to conflict between the groups. Many times, it leads to hampering of
production or work due to personal prejudices at the workplace.

METHODS OF RESOLVING CONFLICT

People deal with conflict in a variety of ways, therefore you need different conflict
resolution strategies.Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann developed five conflict
resolution strategies that people use to handle conflict, including avoiding, Competing,
compromising, accommodating, and collaborating.
This is based on the assumption that people choose how cooperative and how assertive
to be in a conflict. It suggests that everyone has preferred ways of responding to conflict,
but most of us use all methods under various circumstances. It is helpful to understand
the five methods, particularly when you want to move a group forward.

#1: Avoiding
Avoiding is when people just ignore or withdraw from the conflict. They choose this
method when the discomfort of confrontation exceeds the potential reward of
resolution of the conflict. While this might seem easy to accommodate for the
facilitator, people aren’t really contributing anything of value to the conversation and
may be withholding worthwhile ideas. When conflict is avoided, nothing is resolved.

#2: Competing
Competing is used by people who go into a conflict planning to win. They’re assertive
and not cooperative. This method is characterized by the assumption that one side wins
and everyone else loses. It doesn’t allow room for diverse perspectives into a well
informed total picture. Competing might work in sports or war, but it’s rarely a good
strategy for group problem solving.
#3: Accommodating
Accommodating is a strategy where one party gives in to the wishes or demands of
another. They’re being cooperative but not assertive. This may appear to be a gracious
way to give in when one figures out s/he has been wrong about an argument. It’s less
helpful when one party accommodates another merely to preserve harmony or to avoid
disruption. Like avoidance, it can result in unresolved issues. Too much
accommodation can result in groups where the most assertive parties commandeer the
process and take control of most conversations.
#4: Collaborating
Collaborating is the method used when people are both assertive and cooperative. A
group may learn to allow each participant to make a contribution with the possibility of
co-creating a shared solution that everyone can support. A great way to collaborate and
overcome conflict is to reach out and touch them.
#5: Compromising
Another strategy is compromising, where participants are partially assertive and
cooperative. The concept is that everyone gives up a little bit of what they want, and no
one gets everything they want. The perception of the best outcome when working by
compromise is that which “splits the difference.” Compromise is perceived as being
fair, even if no one is particularly happy with the final outcome.
STRATEGIES FOR RESOLVING INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT: Besides the Transactional Analysis
and Johari Window, there are three other basic strategies that individuals can use in
interpersonal conflict situations (even can be used in inter group and organizational conflict
situations). These are lose-lose, win-lose and win-win approaches of which the win-win
approach is most effective.

Lose-lose: Under this approach both the parties lose. Compromise or taking middle ground,
pay offs (bribes), interference of the third party, resorting to bureaucratic rules are examples
of the strategies.

Win-lose: This is a very common way of resolving conflicts. Under this approach one party in
a conflict situation attempts to marshal its forces to win, and the other party loses. The
following are the characteristics of a win-lose situation:

1. There is clear we-they distinction between the parties

2. The parties direct their energies towards each other in an atmosphere of victory and
defeat.
3. The parties see the issue from their own point of view.
4. The emphasis is on solutions rather than on the attainment of goals, values, or
objectives.
5. Conflicts are personalized and judgmental
6. There is no differentiation or conflict-resolving activities from other group
processes, nor there planned sequence of those activities.
7. The parties take a short-run view of the issues.

Win-win: Probably the most desirable approach for resolving conflicts. Energies and
creativity are aimed at solving the problems rather than beating the other party. The needs
of both the parties are met and both parties receive rewarding outcomes.

III. Intergroup Behaviour and Conflict: These types of conflicts arise because of
Interacting and overlapping role sets(Robert l. Kahn) and Linking groups in organizations
(Rensis Likert).

Characteristics of groups in conflict:

1. There is a clear distinction and comparison between “we” (the in-group) and “they’
(the out-group)
2. A group that feels it is in conflict with another group becomes more cohesive and
pulls together to present a solid front to defeat the other group.
 3. The positive feelings and cohesion within the in-group do not transfer to the
members of the ou-group. The members of the out-group are viewed as the enemy
rather than as neutrals.
4. The threatened group members feel superior – they overestimate their strength and
underestimate that of members of other groups
5. The amount of communication between conflicting groups decreases. When there is
communication, it is characterized by negative comments and hostility.
6. If a group is losing in a conflict, the member’s cohesion decreases and they
experience increased tension among themselves. They look for a scapegoat to blame
their failure on.
III. Organisational Conflict: The conflicts which are structural are covered here. The
following examples indicate the sources of potential conflict:
The boss wants more production; subordinates want more consideration.
Customers demand faster deliveries; peers request schedule delays.
Consultants suggest changes; subordinates resist change. The rule book
prescribes formula; the staff says it will not work.

It has been suggested that there are four causes of organizational conflict: They are; 1) An
incompatible goals situation; 2) the existence of incompatible or incompatible resource
allocation;3) a problem of status incongruities; and 4) a difference in perceptions.

There are four predominant types of structural conflict:

1) Hierarchical conflict: Conflict between various levels of the organisation

2) Functional conflict: Conflict between various functional departments of the

organisation

3) Line-staff conflict: Conflicts between line and staff

4) Formal-informal conflict: Conflict between formal and informal organizations.

STRATEGIES FOR MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT:

1) Bargaining Approach: Increase the pool of resources or decrease the demand of the
competing parties
2) Bureaucratic Approach: deal it with vertical, authority relationships in a hierarchical
structure and substitute impersonal bureaucratic rules for personal control.
3) Systems Approach: Concerned with the coordination problems. It deals with the lateral
or horizontal relationships between functions (for example , marketing and production)
of an organization.

Questions :

1. What are the primary reasons of conflict in any organization.

2. What are the different types of conflict that we witness in organizations
3. What are the different ways in which conflict can be managed. Explain with examples.

Cases :
1. When one division makes all the money but others get all the attention.
2. Riverdale Hospital - The whistle blower in pursuit of the missing money.