1. Organizational Behavior: Conflict and Negotiation
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

2. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Conflict
Conflict: “The process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party.”
Functional (Constructive) conflict serves the organization’s interests while
dysfunctional conflict threatens the organization’s interests.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

3. Brown’s Conflict Continuum
Positive
Appropriate
Conflict
Neutral
Outcomes
Too Much
Conflict
Too Little
Conflict
Negative
Moderate
Low
Highe
Intensity
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

4. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Traditional
Transitions
in Conflict
Thought
Human
Relations
The traditional view of conflict has argued that it must be avoided because it indicates a malfunction in the group. Conflict was viewed negatively as being synonymous with violence, destruction, and irrationality. The view that all conflict is bad is simplistic. To improve group or organizational performance, all we need to do is address the causes of conflict and correct them. Although strong evidence disputes this view, many use it to evaluate conflict.
The human relations view argues that conflict is a natural, inevitable outcome in any group. Since conflict is inevitable, it should be accepted. And there are even times when conflict may benefit the performance of a group. This view dominated conflict theory from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s.
The current approach is the interactionist view. It encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious, peaceful, tranquil, cooperative group is likely to become static and apathetic--unable to respond to the challenges of the global marketplace. The major contribution of this approach is to urge group leaders to maintain an ongoing minimal level of conflict--enough to keep the group alive, self-critical, and creative.
Interactionist
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

5. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
The Conflict Process
Perceived
Conflict
Felt
Manifest
Conflict
Sources of
Conflict
Conflict
Outcomes
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

6. A Conflict Model (Figure 10-8)
Aftermath of
Preceding Episode
Latent Conflict
Felt Conflict
Perceived Conflict
Environmental
Effects
Strategic
Considerations
Manifest Conflict
Attention-
Focus and
Diversion
Mechanisms
Organizational
and Extra-
Tensions
Conflict
Resolution
Conflict Aftermath
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

7. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
A Conflict Model
Latent Conflict. Latent conflict is essentially conflict waiting to happen.
Felt Conflict. Felt conflict is experienced as discomfort and tension.
Perceived Conflict. Perceived conflict is the awareness that we are in a conflict situation.
Manifest Conflict. After conflict is perceived and felt, it may or may not become open, or manifest.
Conflict Aftermath. Conflict is likely to breed more conflict and, when it does, that conflict is likely to take on a life of its own.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

8. Desired Outcomes of Conflict
Agreement: Strive for equitable and fair agreements that last.
Stronger relationships: Build bridges of goodwill and trust for the future.
Learning: Greater self-awareness and creative problem solving.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

9. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Types of Conflict
Line – Staff Conflict
Intrapersonal Conflict
Approach-Approach
Approach - Avoidance
Avoidance – Avoidance
Interpersonal Conflict
Intergroup Conflict
Cross – Cultural Conflict
Task Conflict
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

10. Antecedents of Conflict
Incompatible personalities or value systems.
Overlapping or unclear job boundaries.
Competition for limited resources.
Interdepartment /intergroup competition.
Inadequate communication.
Interdependent tasks.
Organizational complexity.
Unreasonable or unclear policies, standards, or rules.
Unreasonable deadlines or extreme time pressure.
Collective decision making.
Decision making by consensus.
Unmet expectations.
Unresolved or suppressed conflict.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

11. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Sources of Conflict
Goal
Incompatibility
Goals conflict with goals of others
Different Values
and Beliefs
Different beliefs due to unique background, experience, training
Caused by specialized tasks, careers
Explains misunderstanding in cross-cultural and merger relations
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

12. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Sources of Conflict
Goal
Incompatibility
Three levels of interdependence
Resource A B C
Pooled
Different Values
and Beliefs
Task
Interdependence A B C
Sequential A B C
Reciprocal
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

13. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Sources of Conflict
Goal
Incompatibility
Different Values
and Beliefs
Task
Interdependence
Scarce
Resources
Increases competition for resources to fulfill goals
Ambiguity
Lack of rules guiding relations
Encourages political tactics
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

14. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Sources of Conflict
Goal
Incompatibility
Different Values
and Beliefs
Task
Interdependence
Lack of opportunity
--reliance on stereotypes
Lack of ability
-- arrogant communication heightens conflict perception
Lack of motivation
-- conflict causes lower motivation to communicate, increases stereotyping
Scarce
Resources
Ambiguity
Communication
Problems
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

15. Conflict Management Styles: Orientations
Win-win orientation
You believe parties will find a mutually beneficial solution to their disagreement
Win-lose orientation
You believe that the more one party receives, the less the other receives
Tends to escalate conflict, use of power/politics
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

16. Tips for Managers Whose Employees Are Having a Personality Conflict
Follow company policies for diversity, anti-discrimination, and sexual harassment.
Investigate and document conflict.
If appropriate, take corrective action (e.g., feedback or B Mod).
If necessary, attempt informal dispute resolution.
Refer difficult conflicts to human resource specialists or hired counselors for formal resolution attempts and other interventions.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

17. Minimizing Inter-group Conflict: An Updated Contact Model
Level of perceived
Inter-group conflict tends to increase when:
Recommended actions:
Work to eliminate specific negative interactions between groups (and members).
Conduct team building to reduce intragroup conflict and prepare employees for cross-functional teamwork.
Encourage personal friendships and good working relationships across groups and departments.
Foster positive attitudes toward members of other groups (empathy, compassion, sympathy).
Avoid or neutralize negative gossip across groups or departments.
Conflict within the group is high
There are negative interactions between groups (or between members of those groups)
Influential third-party gossip about other group is negative
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

18. Skills and Best Practices: How to Build Cross-Cultural Relationships
Behavior Rank
Be a good listener
Be sensitive to the needs of others
Be cooperative, rather than overly competitive
Advocate inclusive (participative) leadership
Compromise rather than dominate
Build rapport through conversations
Be compassionate and understanding
Avoid conflict by emphasizing harmony
Nurture others (develop and mentor)
Tie
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

19. Stimulating Functional Conflict
Devil,s Advocacy
Dialectic Method
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

20. Conflict Management Styles
Integrating
Obliging
High
Compromising
Concern for Others
Dominating
Avoiding
Low
High
Low
Concern for Self
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

21. Conflict Management Styles
Competing. Involves trying to win at the other party’s expense. Generally leads to antagonism and festering resentment.
Avoiding. Attempts to avoid or smooth over conflict situations. Generally unproductive.
Accommodating. Involves acceding completely to the other party’s wishes or at least cooperating with little or no attention to one’s own interests.
Compromising. Involves an attempt to find a satisfactory middle ground (“split the difference”)
Collaborating. This problem-solving style is mutually beneficial. Requires trust, open sharing of information, and creativity.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

22. Fitting Conflict Style to the Situation
Appropriate Situation
Competing
Time is short and we're sure we're correct.
The other party would take advantage of a collaborative approach.
Avoiding
The conflict is trivial.
We need a temporary, cooling-off tactic.
Accommodating
The other party has great power.
The issue isn't important to us.
Compromising
There is little chance of agreement, both parties have equal power, and there are time constraints.
Collaborating
This is the "ideal" style to be sought unless the parties to conflict have perfectly opposing interests.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

23. View of Ethics in Conflict Management
Utilitarian
Golden Rule
Kantian/ Rights
Enlightened Self Interest
Justice Approach
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

24. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Conflict Premises
Conflict and disagreement are normal in human relationships.
Conflict may be good.
The way in which conflict is framed may influence its nature and outcomes.
Relationship/task
Emotional/intellectual
Cooperate/win
A mutually acceptable solution can often be found.
Any of the parties to conflict can contribute to its resolution by taking personal responsibility and initiating communications.
Trusting behavior can evoke trusting behavior.
Consensus and synergy are likely only when people choose to cooperate in a win-win relationship rather than compete.
Some conflicts may never be resolved because of fear, rigidity, intolerance, paranoia, or other emotional impairment.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

25. Approaches to Conflict Resolution
Reduced
Conflict
Improve
Communications
Clarify Job
Responsibilities
Develop
Employees’
Negotiating Skills
Use Third
Parties as
Mediators
Separate
Conflicting
Parties
Bring Parties
Together to Foster
Understanding and
Cooperation
Focus on
Larger Goals
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

26. Communication Guidelines to Build More Productive Relationships
Be honest; say what’s on your mind now. Be open.
Be specific; provide examples.
Don’t use the words never and always.
Listen in depth; reflect and paraphrase what you hear.
Ask questions to clarify the meaning of what the other person is saying.
Focus on behavior that the other person controls.
Maintain good eye contact.
Focus on only one specific issue or behavior at a time.
Don’t interrupt.
Stay there. Don’t walk away mentally, emotionally, physically, or psychologically.
Be direct and tactful.
Use I statements rather than you statements (e.g., “When this happens, I feel …” rather than “When you do this, it makes me feel …”).
Don’t attack the other person by ridiculing, taunting, or otherwise being rude and hostile.
Don’t defend yourself by blaming others, avoiding, or withdrawing.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

27. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Negotiating
Negotiation: “A give-and-take decision-making process involving interdependent parties with different preferences.”
Distributive negotiation: Single issue; fixed-pie; win-lose.
Integrative negotiation: More than one issue; win-win.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

28. The Two Types of Bargaining Strategies
Characteristics
Distributive
Bargaining
Integrative
Bargaining
Available Resources
Primary Motivations
Primary Interests
Focus of Relationships
Fixed Amount
I Win, You Lose
Opposed
Short-Term
Variable Amount
I Win, You Win
Congruent
Long-Term
Two negotiation methods are distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining.
When negotiating the price of a used car, the buyer and seller are engaged in distributive bargaining. This type of bargaining is a zero-sum game: any gain that one party makes comes at the expense of the other party. So, the essence is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie.
The next technique assumes that more than one “win-win” settlement exists. Generally preferable to distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining builds long-term relationships because each negotiator can leave the table feeling victorious. For integrative bargaining to succeed, negotiators must be open, candid, sensitive, trusting, and flexible.
All things being equal, integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining. The former builds long-term relationships and facilitates future cooperation. The latter, on the other hand, leaves one party a loser; so it can build animosities and deepen divisions when people have to work together on an ongoing basis.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

29. An Integrative Approach: Added-Value Negotiation
Clarify interests.
Identify options.
Design alternative deal packages.
Select a deal.
Perfect the deal.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

30. Situational Influences on Negotiation
Location
Physical Setting
Time Investment and Deadlines
Audience .
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

31. Gholipour A. 2006. Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.
Bargaining Zone Model
Your Positions
Initial
Target
Resistance
Area of
Potential
Agreement
Resistance
Target
Initial
Opponent’s Positions
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

32. Decision-Making Biases That Impede Negotiations
Escalation of commitment
The mythical fixed pie
Anchoring and adjustments
Framing negotiations
Availability of information
The winner’s curse
Overconfidence
Irrational escalation of commitment occurs when people continue a previously selected course of action beyond what rational analysis would recommend. Such misdirected persistence can waste a great deal of time, energy, and cash.
The mythical fixed pie. Bargainers assume that their gain must come at the expense of the other party. By assuming a “zero-sum game” they exclude any opportunities for finding “win-win” solutions.
Anchoring and adjustments. People often anchor their judgments on irrelevant information, such as initial offers. Effective negotiators do not let an initial anchor minimize the amount of information and depth of analysis they use to evaluate a situation.
Framing negotiations. People are affected by the way information is presented to them.
Availability of information. Negotiators often rely too much on information that is readily available while ignoring more relevant data. They should learn to distinguish between what is familiar and what is reliable and relevant.
The winner’s curse is the regret one feels after negotiation. Since your offer was accepted by your opponent, you become concerned that you offered too much. You can reduce the “curse” by getting as much information as possible and putting yourself in your opponent’s shoes.
Overconfidence. When people hold certain beliefs and expectations, they tend to ignore any information that contradicts them. The result is that negotiators tend to be overconfident, which can lessen the incentive to compromise.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

33. Effective Negotiator Behaviours
Plan and Set Goals
Gather Information
Communicate Effectively
Make Appropriate Concessions ..
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

34. Improving Negotiation Skills
Research your opponent
Begin with a positive overture
Address problems, not personalities
Pay little attention to initial offers
Emphasize win-win solutions
Create an open, trusting climate
The following recommendations should help to improve your effectiveness as a negotiator:
1. Research your opponent to acquire as much information as you can about his or her interests and goals. Such knowledge will help you to understand behavior, predict responses to offers, and frame solutions.
2. Begin with a positive overture because research shows that concessions tend to be reciprocated.
3. Address the problem, not personalities. Avoid the tendency to attack your opponent. Separate people from problems; don’t personalize differences.
4. Pay little attention to initial offers. Because everyone has an initial position which tends to be extreme and idealistic, treat initial offers as points of departure.
5. Emphasize “win-win” solutions. Look for an integrative solution. Frame options in terms of your opponent’s interests and look for solutions that will allow both of you to declare victory.
6. Create an open, trusting climate. Ask questions, listen actively, and avoid defensiveness or inappropriate wording. Doing so will help to create a climate that is conducive to an integrative settlement.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

35. Third – Party Negotiations
Mediator
Arbitrator
Conciliator
Consultant
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

36. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Techniques
Facilitation: Third party gets disputants to deal directly and constructively with each other.
Conciliation: Neutral third party acts as communication link between disputants.
Peer review: Impartial co-workers hear both sides and render decision that may or may not be binding.
Ombudsman: Respected and trusted member of the organization hears grievances confidentially.
Mediation: Trained third-party guides disputants toward their own solution.
Arbitration: Neutral third-party hears both sides in a court-like setting and renders a binding decision.
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.

37. Unethical Negotiating Tactics
Lies
Puffery
Deception
Weakening The Opponent
Strengthening One’s Own Position
Information Exploitation
Nondisclosure
Change of Mind
Distraction
Maximization
Gholipour A Organizational Behavior. University of Tehran.