Conflict Management Chapter Ten McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Constructive Confrontation at Intel Intel employees learn to fully evaluate ideas through “constructive confrontation.” The objective is to attack the problem, not the employee, but some critics claim the process is a license for some Intel staff to be bullies.

Conflict Defined The process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: Pre 1970s View Historically, experts viewed conflict as dysfunctional Undermined relations Wasted human energy Results in job dissatisfaction, turnover, stress, lower productivity, less information sharing Level of conflict Conflict outcomes Bad Good Low High

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: 1970s-1990s View From 1970s to 1990s, experts believed there is an optimal level of conflict Dysfunctional to have too little and too much conflict Some conflict is good because: better decisions reexamine assumptions Improves responsiveness to external environment Increases cohesion within the team Level of conflict Conflict outcomes Bad Good Low High Optimal conflict

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: Emerging View Two types of conflict Constructive (task) conflict Conflict is aimed at issue, not parties Produces benefits of conflict Upper limit to any conflict, including constructive Relationship (socioemotional) conflict Aims conflict a the person (e.g. their competence), not the task or issue Introduces perceptual biases Distorts information processing

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: Emerging View Lack of constructive conflict is bad, but some produces positive outcomes, up to a point Relationship conflict is dysfunctional Problem: difficult to separate constructive from relationship conflict Drive to defend naturally activated when ideas are critiqued Level of conflict Conflict outcomes Bad Good Low High Constructive conflict Relationship conflict

Minimizing Relationship Conflict Three conditions that minimize relationship conflict while engaging in constructive conflict Emotional intelligence Cohesive team Supportive team norms

The Conflict Process Conflict Perceptions Emotions Manifest Conflict Sources of Conflict Conflict Outcomes Conflict Escalation Cycle

Structural Sources of Conflict Incompatible Goals One party’s goals perceived to interfere with other’s goals Differentiation Different values/beliefs Explains cross-cultural and generational conflict Task Interdependence Conflict increases with interdependence Higher risk that parties interfere with each other more

Sources of Conflict (con’t) Scarce Resources Motivates competition for the resource Ambiguous Rules Creates uncertainty, threatens goals Without rules, people rely on politics Communication Problems Increases stereotyping Reduces motivation to communicate Escalates conflict when arrogant

Interpersonal Conflict Handling Styles Conflict Management

Interpersonal Conflict Handling Styles High Forcing Problem-solving Assertiveness Compromising Avoiding Yielding Low High Cooperativeness

Problem Solving Conflict Handling at ThedaCare To resolve conflict between nurses and pharmacists regarding prescription ordering, ThedaCare management formed a task force that devised a new system satisfactory to both parties. They resolved their conflict through problem solving.

Problem Solving Conflict Handling Contingencies Problem solving conflict handling is best when… Interests are not perfectly opposing Parties have trust/openness Issues are complex

Other Conflict Handling Style Contingencies Avoiding is best when… relationship conflict is high Conflict resolution cost is higher than its benefits Forcing is best when… You have a deep conviction about your position Quick resolution required Other party would take advantage of cooperation

Other Conflict Handling Style Contingencies (con’t) Yielding is best when… Other party has much more power Issue is much less important to you than other party Value/logic of your position is unsteady Compromising is best when… Parties have equal power Quick solution is required Parties lack trust/openness

Managing Conflict: Superordinate Goals Emphasizing common objectives rather than conflicting sub-goals Reduces goal incompatibility and differentiation

Structural Solutions for Managing Conflict Conflict Management

Managing Conflict: Reducing Differentiation Remove sources of different values and beliefs Move employees around to different jobs, departments, and regions Other ways to reduce differentiation: Common dress code/status Common work experiences

Managing Conflict: Communication/Understanding Employees understand and appreciate each other’s views through communication Relates to contact hypothesis Two warnings: Apply communication/understanding after reducing differentiation A Western strategy that may conflict with values/traditions in other cultures

Other Ways to Manage Conflict Reduce Task Interdependence Dividing shared resources Combine tasks Use buffers Increase Resources Duplicate resources Clarify Rules and Procedures Clarify resource distribution Change interdependence

Types of Third Party Intervention High Mediation Inquisition Level of Process Control Arbitration Low Level of Outcome Control High

Choosing the Best 3rd Party Strategy Managers prefer inquisitional strategy Provides consistency and control Problems: risk of poor decision and less perceived fairness But best solution depends on situation, leader- follower relations, cultural values Mediation potentially offers highest satisfaction with process and outcomes Use arbitration when mediation fails

Conflict Management Chapter Ten