Lee’s Non- Violence in Conflict Management Hun Myoung Park, Ph.D., International University of Japan

2 Conflict Everywhere Conflicts everywhere and everyday Inevitable in organizations “Cooperation is too fragile and fleeting, purposiveness is too elusive, conflict is too frequently and too intensely directed…” (Pondy 1992: 259) Conflicts among Individuals, groups (ethnic groups, interest groups, etc.), departments and agencies, and countries 2

3 Type of Conflicts  Pondy (1967)  Bargaining conflict (interest group relationship in competition)  Bureaucratic conflict (superior-subordinate relationship under vertical or hierarchical dimension)  Systems conflict (lateral or functional relationship) 3

4 Sources of Conflict Organizational culture, values, goals Structures, task, functions Power, leadership Communication (misunderstanding) Environmental pressure Demographics (e.g., ethnic group) Personalities Etc. 4

5 Is Conflict Destructive? “Conflict is not necessarily bad or good” (Pondy 1967: 319) Not necessarily destructive but even required to survive (Robbins 1978) “[C]onflict plays in balancing opposing tendencies and preserving diversity” (Pondy 1992: 261) Some conflict, stress, and tension are necessary for productivity (Boulding 1962) 5

6 Pondy’s Conflict Episode 6

7 Conflict As Episode  Pondy (1967)  Conflict is not a one-shot game or event  A dynamic process  “Each conflict … is made up of a sequence of interlocking conflict episodes”  “[E]ach episode exhibits a sequence or pattern of development”  “Conflict may be functional”  “Conflict is intimately tied up with the stability of the organization.” 7

8 Conflict Episodes 1  Pondy (1967)  Latent conflict  perceived  felt  manifest  conflict aftermath  Latent Conflict. Conditions set the stage and conflict waiting to happen.  Perceived Conflict. People may sense conflict but may downplay or deny it.  Felt Conflict. Conflict is experienced as discomfort, such as with tension or anger. 8

9 Conflict Episodes 2  Manifest Conflict. Conflict becomes open warfare (figuratively or actually) with a winner and loser. This is the time for intervention; conflict is destructive if not channeled.  Conflict Aftermath. This is the stage after the outbreak, when results (or its alternative) are evident. Conflict often breeds more conflict and, when it does, that conflict is likely to take on a life of its own. 9

10

11 Fisher et al. Getting to Yes 11

12 Getting to Yes 1 Fisher, Ury & Patton(1981, 2011) Positional bargaining –Soft bargaining –Hard bargaining Principled bargaining 12

13

14

15 Getting to Yes 2 Principled bargaining –Separate the people from the problem –Focus on interests, not positions –Invest options for mutual gain –Insist on using objective criteria 15

16 Getting to Yes 3 General strategies applied to any conflict cases Focus more on how to communicate with counterparts efficiently and effectively Avoid destructive conflicts Rational (maximizing benefits and minimizing costs) rather and enlightening Positive rather than normative 16

17 Lee’s Transcendental Ethics 17

18 Transcendental Ethics 1 Lee (1996) Minimum conditions for symbiosis (coexistence of two extremes) Nonviolence  Personal ethics  Social (intrapersonal) ethics  Self-sacrifice 18

19 Transcendental Ethics 2 Non-violence –Not to do what ought not to be done –Not to be obedient but to say what is right and true –To be rational, calm, etc. (as opposed to be emotional) –Why non-violence? A way to protect from violence of the power and to survive

20 Transcendental Ethics 3 Individual ethics: getting knowledge and skills, pursuing cooperation and agreement with members Social ethics: to improve social relationship and welfare rather than providing quantitative services and materials Self-sacrifice

21 Transcendental Ethics 4 Non-violence: 非暴力 Individual ethics: 禮智, improving social efficiency (cooperation) Social ethics: 仁, improving social relationship, public issues not private ones Self-sacrifice: 義

22 Examples Non-violence: not to fire those whose ideologies are different from mine Individual ethics: merit based management Social ethics: no discrimination and consider minority Self-sacrifice: consider different opinions favorably (↔Stick to rules only) Major General Equivalent (MGE) case

23 Comparison 1 Principled bargaining is similar to non- violence (and/or personal ethics) in Lee’s transcendental ethics. Exclude brutal violence (including verbal expression) and emotional behavior Stick to rules (principles)

24 Comparison 2 But principled bargaining is aimed at mutual gain of individuals rather than social consideration (self-sacrifice) Lee’s transcendental ethics implicitly assume an adverse circumstance where the counterpart (e.g., dictatorship) is strong and insidious.

25 Comparison 3 Conflicts in vertical (rather than horizontal) relationships Counterpart is oftentimes bad and strong Counterpart is a structure (dictatorship) rather than individuals

26 Comparison 4 Transcendece EthicsPrincipled Bargaining Non-violence Personal ethic Social ethic Self-sacrifice Four principles Specific condition Structure Enlightening Normative General conditions Individuals Rational Positive

27 Managerial Leadership 1 “As an ‘orchestrator’ of conflicts” (Pondy 1992: 261) Manage conflict so that it is not destructive to organizations. Managing conflicts rather than resolving conflicts (Robbins 1978) How to transcend manger’s ethics to reach self-sacrifice?

28 Managerial Leadership 2 1.Recognize what government ought not to do (non-violence). 2.Decline the offer to connive and get benefits from bad government (boss). 3.Get penalty due to decline of the offer. 4.Eagerly enjoy the sacrifice (penalty) because he/she has 仁 and 義 5.Self-sacrifice (rules or principles for which he/she strive) becomes save the people and organizations

29 Reference Boulding, Kenneth Conflict and defense. New York: Harper. Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in, 3th ed. New York: Penguin. Lee, Moon-Young The analects of confucius, the works of Mencius, and public administration. [Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Nanam Publishing House.

30 Reference Pondy, Louis R Organization conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science Quarterly 12(2): Pondy, Louis R Reflections on organizational conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior 13(3): Rapoport, Anatol Conflict in man- made environment. New York: Penguin Books.

31 Reference Robbins, Stephen P "Conflict management" and "conflict resolution" are not synonymous terms. California Management Review 21(2): Schellenberg, James A The science of conflict. Oxford University Press.