Week 7: Coordination & Conflict (10/24) Professor Payal Sharma MANAGEMENT 101 Week 7: Coordination & Conflict (10/24) Professor Payal Sharma

Class Agenda Housekeeping: Assorted Lecture: (Dis)advantages of group decision-making Approaches to group decision-making Types of conflict Resolving conflict Article: Taking the Stress Out Takeaways Next Time Midterm Exam Review Session

Group DM Advantages Resources: Group members combine different skills and knowledge to make higher-quality decisions Example: Member interactions lead to new ideas that no single member would have developed (called “process gain”) Motivational effects: Being part of a group encourages members to try to make good decisions and perform better Example: Members are more committed to a decision in which they have participated, so are more likely to support its implementation

Group DM Disadvantages Inefficient: Groups suffer from “process loss” due to “wasted” discussion which prevents groups a sole focus on the tasks Example: Discussions about coordination and social issues Communication problems: Decisions can get bogged down in emotional conflicts that waste time and damage morale Example: Power team members who talk too much can dominate discussion or group gets sidetracked Information under-utilization: Group discussions are not always good at eliciting information Example: Groups do not pool all knowledge available; instead focusing on commonly held information

Approaches to Decision Making Leader-Oriented Consultative: Leader consults with group members Group Technique Democratic: Group votes and majority rules Full Participation Consensus: Group reaches consensus

Leader consults with group members Leader-Oriented Consultative: Leader consults with group members Pro: Very efficient, takes little time and may provide leader with crucial information to help make a decision Con: Uses only some of team’s resources, may not fully develop member commitment or resolve conflict, and may encourage competition among team members to influence the leader

Group Technique Democratic: Group votes and majority rules Pro: Quick way of including members’ opinions and can produce high-quality decisions Con: Voting can prematurely close discussion and lead to lack of commitment or resentment from losing minority (creating “winners” versus “losers)

Group reaches consensus Pro: Best way to fully utilize the team’s resources and decisions made with this approach have a greater likelihood of implementation by the team Full Participation Consensus: Group reaches consensus Con: Time-consuming and takes greater skills and energy to reach consensus

Task (or Cognitive) Conflict Refers to disagreement about tasks/ideas regarding distribution of resources; procedures and policies; and judgments and interpretations of facts Examples include: Different ideas or opinions when completing assignments Consideration of pros and cons of each other’s opinions Debating merits of different ideas when analyzing information or making decisions Discussion of evidence for alternative solutions when formulating team recommendations

Helpful versus Harmful Conflict Benefits include: Ensures the most influential person does not determine the course of action Enables people to learn from each other and consider each other’s views Increases likelihood that people will accept the final decision Teams MORE focused, creative, integrative and open. Not ALWAYS helpful, however…

Relationship (or Affective) Conflict Refers to interpersonal incompatibilities, such as feelings of frustration, annoyance, and irritation Examples include: Emotional disagreement Personal friction Tensions amongst team members

Helpful versus Harmful Conflict Consequences include: Blocks communication and draws the focus from the team to the individuals. Limits communication to a few people and decreases the quality of work. Decreases the likelihood that people will accept final decisions and work together well in the long-term. Teams LESS focused, creative, integrative and open. Not ALWAYS harmful, however…

Research Findings (Sharma) Empowering leadership and relationship conflict oppositely effect team members’ motivation and empowering leadership positively impacts motivation when relationship conflict is low (Chen, Sharma, Edinger, Shapiro & Farh, 2010) Tested using survey data from field (with EMBA students as leaders in U.S. and China) and in scenario-based experimental study using U.S. undergraduate students

Study 1 Results (Scenario)

Article: Taking the Stress Out The article discusses three strategies that can be used to make conversations less stressful, or difficult (honor thy partner, disarm by restating intentions, and fight tactics, not people). For which types of conflict are each of the strategies appropriate? Why or why not? How could each of these tactics have been used by Dick, Jane, Harry, Rajesh, Mark, and Svetlana? In other words, how could these tactics have improved the conflict dynamics in Learning Team #28 to help resolve their problems? Be specific.

Takeaways Coordination by teams – specifically, decision making – can be approached through different tactics, each with their own costs and benefits Conflict is not always good or bad for teams – it depends on type Conflict that starts out idea-based can, at high levels, start to become personal To address or resolve conflict, different tactics can be used which reflect responsibilities on the part of both parties involved

Next Time Week 8 (10/31): Midterm Exam Time: 6pm-8pm Locations: See Canvas (Student Resources  Exams)

Course Grade Individual Course Engagement Individual Assignment Midterm Exam Final Exam 15% 30% 25% 20 points 30 points 60 points 50 points Team Project 70 points TOTAL: 100% 230 points

Hierarchy of Learning Level 4: Level 4: SYNTHESIS Synthesis Ability to move easily between levels and integrate thinking across course sessions and topics Level 2: UNDERSTANDING Grasping the meaning of the information presented (involves thinking about material beyond class itself) Level 3: Application Level 2: Understanding Level 3: APPLICATION Objective is to apply knowledge to real-world team situations in a variety of settings Level 1: KNOWLEDGE A solid foundation is necessary for any building (i.e., completing course readings and attending class) Level 1: Knowledge