CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Introduction:

The term ‘Conflicting views’ denotes difference of opinions between two or more persons or groups.
Conflicts occur at various levels within the individuals, between the individuals in a group and between the
groups.

Follett most simply defines conflict as “the appearance of difference, difference of opinions of interests”.

Conflict has been defined as a process in which an individual purposefully makes a concerted effort to
offset the efforts of another individual by some form of blockage that causes frustration to the latter in
accomplishing his goals or furtherance of his interests.

Nature of Conflict:

In the context of an organization, broad features of a conflict are as under:

a. Conflicts occur when individuals are not able to choose among the available alternative courses of action.

b. Conflict between two individuals implies that they have conflicting perceptions, values and goals.

c. Conflict is a dynamic process as it indicates a series of events. Each conflict is made up of a series of
interlocking conflict episodes.

d. Conflict must be perceived by the parties to it. If no one is aware of a conflict, then it is generally agreed
that no conflict exists.

1
Types of Conflict

I. Individual Conflict:

1. Intra Individual Conflict:

A. Role Conflict and Ambiguity:

i. Intra- sender role conflict

ii. Inter-sender role conflict
iii. Person-role conflict
iv. Inter-role conflict
v. Role Overload

B. Goal Conflict:

i. Approach-approach conflict
ii Avoidance-avoidance conflict
iii. Approach-avoidance conflict

2. Inter Individual Conflict:

A. Informational Factors
B. Difference in Perceptions
C. Difference in Value Systems
D. Scarcity of Resources
E. Difference in Status
F. Divergent Roles

II. Group Conflict:

1. Intra group Conflict:

2. Inter group conflict:

A. Joint decision-making
i. Sharing of Resources
ii. Inter-dependency
iii. Need for Co-ordination

B. Difference in Goals
C. Difference in Perception
D. Task Ambiguity
E. Difference in Work Orientation
F. Organizational Reward System

2
III. Organizational Conflict:

1. Institutional Conflict:

A. Individual vs. Individual Conflict

B. Individual vs. Organizational Conflict
C. Hierarchical Conflict
D. Functional Conflict
E. Line-staff Conflict

2. Emergent Conflict:

A. Individual vs. Informal group

B. Formal-informal Conflict
C. Status Conflict
D. Political Conflict

3
These classes of conflict are discussed below:

I. Individual conflict: In this case, the individual is not in a position to take a decision about certain
matter. He faces difficulty to choose out of the alternative courses of action, which are either unacceptable
or uncertain or incomparable. The management can help the individual in such a situation by providing him
counseling service.

1. Intra-Individual Conflict: In an intra-individual conflict, the individual is in a state of conflict in

his mind as he is not able to take any decision in a given situation.
Intra-individual conflict arises within an individual member of the organization. Intra-individual conflict
generally arises because of in-congruency between individual goals and organizational goals and other
situations where there is widespread uncertainty and scarcity of acceptable alternatives.

March and Simon are of the view that individual dissatisfaction is the outcome of disparity between
aspiration levels and achievements. The greater the disparity between aspiration levels and achievements,
the higher is the probability of intra-individual conflict.

Intra- personal conflicts arises due to role conflict and goal conflict discussed below:

A. Role conflict and ambiguity: A role is a set of activities expected of a person holding a particular
position in a group or organization. When the communication of role expectations is distorted, role
ambiguity and role conflict may occur.
If a person is not clear about his job duties, the resulting role ambiguity can be stressful for him. He will
lose his self-confidence and will draw less satisfaction from the job. Role ambiguity arises if either the
manager has not properly communicated the duties of the subordinate or the subordinate has note properly
understood the boss.

i. Intra-sender role conflict: This conflict arises when person is asked to do a job, which he is not capable
of doing or time and resources are not sufficient to do the job. For instances, a purchase agent is asked by
his superior to buy materials which are not easily available and is also instructed not to buy in the black
market.

ii. Inter sender role conflict: Different role- set members may have conflicting expectations from a
particular member. For example, the boss asks the supervisor to exercise strict control over subordinates,
but subordinates want loose supervision.

iii. Person- role conflict: This conflict occurs when a person is asked to a job, which is incompatible with
his own value system.
For instance a manger may be asked to get favors from public officials by bribing them, but his value
system does not permit him to do so.

iv. Inter –role conflict: Such conflict arises when an individual holds multiple and divergent roles. For
example, a worker spends overtime at the work at the order of the boss, and his family is upset as he is not
devoting sufficient time to the family.

4
v. Role-overload: A common form of conflict is role –overload. This is a situation in which there are
simply too many role expectations being communicated to a person at a given time. There is too much to be
done and too little time to do it.

Role ambiguities and conflict can create tensions among individuals and affect their attitudes and
behaviours adversely. The Managers should try to minimize such situations by maintaining effective two-
way communications among all members of his role sets.

B. Goal Conflict: Intra –individual conflicts also include actual or perceived pressures from incompatible
goals or expectation of the following types:

i. Approach –approach conflict: Such a conflict arises when a person has to choose from two or more
equally attractive goals. He can choose only one goal at the cost of other.
For instance, a person has to choose between accepting a promotion in the present organization and taking a
desirable job with another organization.

ii. Avoidance-avoidance conflict: This conflict arises when a person has to choose between two
alternatives each with negative aspects. Both the alternatives are equally unattractive.
For instance, a person may dislike his present job but the alternative of resigning and looking for another
job is equally unattractive.

iii. Approach-avoidance conflict: In this type of conflict, an individual is faced with an alternative that
has both positive and negative consequences.
For example, a person may be offered a promotion carrying much higher pay but away from his home-
town.

2. Inter Individual Conflict: In case of inter-individual conflict two persons are not able to reconcile
their views and hence there is a break-down of mechanism of decision making.
Inter –Individual conflict arises from differences between the choices made by different individuals in the
organization. Each individual has a separate acceptable alternative of action and different individuals prefer
different alternatives.

Sources of Inter-personal Conflicts:

The sources of conflicts are found in some degree of actual or perceived divergence of interest. It may be
noted that people disagree over facts, goals, methods and values because they have different interests and
perceptions. The important factors which contributes to inter-personal conflicts are as follows:

A. Informational Factors: These exert their influence when various points of view have been developed on
the basis of different sets of facts. Because each of the participants has contact with a different set or has a
limited knowledge, they disagree.

B. Difference in Perceptions: The perceptual factors exert their influence when the persons have different
images of the same stimulus. Because of perception each will attend to and select from the information
available, those items which he thinks important. Each will interpret the information in a some-what
different manner. The picture, which he gets from his own experience, is unique to him.

5
Thus it is not surprising that the same basic facts may produce distinctive perceptual pictures in the minds
of different individuals.

C. Difference in Value Systems: Two persons may have misunderstanding between themselves because of
difference in their value systems and social backgrounds.
For instance, production manager may suggest lowering of product quality to increase profits but the
marketing manager may term it unethical.

D. Scarcity of resources: Inter- personal conflicts also arise when individuals compete for scarce resources.
For example, if three qualified employees compete for one higher vacancy, conflict may develop among
them. Similarly, availability of a common telephone facility to a number of executives may be a source of
conflict among them.

E. Different in Status: Each individual occupies a certain position or status in the society and in the
organization. The fact that he occupies such a position or status may put certain constraints on him if the
discussion is related to his role.
For example, a higher-level executive may consider it below status to go to a junior executive to seek some
clarifications. Such status differences also block communication, which leads to inter individual conflict.

F. Divergent Roles: A role is set of expectations people have about the behavior or responsibilities of a
person in a position. Role conflict is the result of divergent role expectations. It exists when the
expectations of a job are quite different and the individual cannot meet one expectation without rejecting the
other. Such situation arises when the roles are so conflicting that one does not know which set of
expectations one should follow in the given situation.
Inter-personal conflicts can be resolved through counseling, effective communication win-win negotiation
and transactional analysis.

II. Group Conflict: Conflicts or difference of opinions arises between the groups members are known
as group conflict. Some time different group members may also have conflicts between the groups
concerned. A group consists of two or more persons, who are in interaction with each other, have a well –
defined structure of role and status relations and have a system of values and norms of behavior for the
smooth working of the group.

1. Intra-Group Conflict: Intra group conflict arises when differences over an issue crop up between
the members of the group. In case of Intra-group the process of conflict can be explained as breakdown of
decision-making mechanism between the members of the same group.

Intra-group conflict may arise in three ways:

a. When the group faces a novel problem.
b. When new values are imported from the social environment into the group.
c. When a persons extra group role comes into conflicts with his intra-group role.

Individuals are generally members of different groups for different purposes. Inter –Individual conflicts
may gradually leads to an intra-group conflict. It is also possible that in case of an intra group conflict of
serious nature member of the group may be divided into two groups and thus the intra group conflict may be
transformed into inter group conflict.

6
2. Inter Group-Conflict: Conflicts between different groups in the organization are known as inter
group conflicts. Inter –group behavior occurs whenever individuals belonging to one group interact,
collectively or individually with another group or its members in terms of their reference group
identification.
A conflict between production team and marketing team is an example of Inter-group conflict.

Inter group conflicts may arise based on the following reasons.

A. Joint Decision-making: The need for joint decision-making is felt because of the following factors.

i. Sharing of resources: The resources at the disposal of the organization are limited and they have to be
shared by different groups. Each group wants a greater share of the limited resources.

ii . Inter-dependency: Interdependency of various departments requires decisions regarding sharing of

resources and fixing of schedules for the completion of various jobs.
For instance, there may be misunderstanding between marketing and production departments if the latter is
not able to complete an order as desired by the former.

iii. Need for coordination: Coordination at the higher levels requires joint decision-making by various
departmental heads. If they are not able to pool their knowledge and resources effectively, conflicts are
likely to arise.
Competition among the various groups or departments may lead to high tensions on certain occasions.

B. Difference in goals: Various groups differ in their views about organizational goals because of the
following reasons:

i. Differences in sub-goals: There are differences in sub-goals of various groups. If a person is a member
of various groups, he may face role conflict because goals of the organization are different from sub-goals
of various groups.

ii. Socio-cultural differences: Individuals who are members of different groups differ in family
background, culture, education, training, etc; professionals look at the organizational goals from their
respective professional point of view. Thus, conflicts over goals arise.

iii. Division of work: Division of work and departmentation may lead to certain groups, which might
internalize their group goals. They may not be able to relate their group goals to the organizational goals,
which might be highly non-operational or vague.

iv. Pattern of interaction: Pattern of interaction among the group members may lead to differentiations of
goals.
For example, if people in a group do not interact frequently, there is bound to be differentiation of goals.
But if the group members interact quite often they are likely to share some goals with the other groups.

7
C. Difference in Perceptions: Difference in perceptions of people arises because of the following factors:
i. When people differ in their views about goals, perceptions are bound to be different.
ii. Perceptions of people may differ because of differences in background factors such as family
background, culture, education, training etc. The value system also influences the perception of people to a
great extent.
iii. People may have different perceptions or if the flow of information is not smooth. Lack or inadequacy
of information with some people is bound to affect their perceptions.

D. Task Ambiguity: Inter-group conflict is likely to arise when it is not certain which group is responsible
for certain activities. This lack of clarity over job responsibilities is called task ambiguity, and it frequently
leads to hostility between work groups.
Important job duties fall between the cracks, and each group is upset with the other for what it perceives to
be the other’s shortcomings. Task ambiguity often arises when the firm is growing fast or its external
environment is changing rapidly. Task ambiguity leading to inter group conflict may occur in the
recruitment of new employees. Both the personnel department and the specific functional departments (e.g.
marketing, operations, finance) of a firm have responsibilities in recruiting, identifying candidates,
interviewing candidates, making selection decisions etc. Some time there is conflict over who has the final
authority to make and execute selection decisions. Final offers are held up as personnel and the functional
areas each assert what they perceive to be their prerogatives.

E. Differences in work orientation: The ways in which employees handle their work and deal with others
vary widely across functional departments of an organization.

Firstly, functional groups differ in their time perspectives.

For example Research and Development (R&D) Scientist have much longer –range goals than
manufacturing groups.

Secondly, the goals of different functional groups vary greatly. The goals of a manufacturing unit are more
specific than the goals of an R& D unit: manufacturing has precise targets for volume, cost savings and
percentage of defectives; while R&D has much broader and less easily measurable goals such as developing
new products and suggesting potentials market applications.

Thirdly the interpersonal orientations of people in different departments vary. R&D labs need and
encourage a level of informality an organic structure and a collegiality that might be dysfunctional in a
manufacturing department.

The greater the differences in goal time and inter personal orientation between two work units, the more
likely it is that conflict will arise between them when they have to coordinate their work efforts.These
difference in work orientation lead groups to be frustrated with, and to misinterpret the behavior of other
groups.

F. Organizational reward system: Inter-group conflicts also arise because of the way in which an
organization monitors group performance and distribute rewards-both economic and non- economic. If the
reward system allows only one group to accomplish its goals at the expense of other groups, there are bound
to be conflicts and even power struggle among the groups.
For instance, an organization may reward the sales unit for higher sales. The advertisement group and
production group who are denied the rewards may feel bad and develop conflicts with the sales unit and
may even sabotage the efforts of the sales unit in achieving higher sales turnover.

8
III. Organizational Conflict: Organizational conflict has an underlying commonality, insofar as it
stems from the pursuit of what are perceived to be incompatible goals in a way that may benefit one party at
the cost of another. Organizational conflict has been classified in many ways. One of these classifications is
institutionalized conflict and emergent conflict.

1. Institutionalized Conflict: Institutionalized conflict originates from division of work. Different

departments have not only incompatible goals, but, even within a single department, competition for
organizational rewards causes intense conflict among members.

A. Individual vs. Individual Conflict: Individual vs. individual conflict is common at work.
For example, two individuals may compete for promotion to a single vacancy in a particular department, or
two managers may fight for a larger portion of corporate capital. In this type of conflict, every individual
attempts to occupy a scarce resource, including tangible and intangible goals such as status, prestige, power,
money, etc. This conflict is based on ‘win-lose’ analysis. If one individual reaches his goal, another must
lose it.

B. Individual vs. Organizational Conflicts: Individual vs. Organizational conflict has been stressed by
Argyris, who asserts that there exist in-congruencies between the needs of a psychologically mature
individual and formal organization. While the individual wants independence, long-term perspective etc, the
organization wants dependents, short-term perspective etc. The conflict stemming from this inherent in-
congruency causes frustration, a sense of failure and loss of self-esteem.

C. Hierarchical Conflict: Hierarchical conflict is the outcome of hierarchy-based incompatibility. A higher

levels, there prevails broader and long-range responsibility, whereas at lower levels, there exists
specialization of task. Accordingly, a supervisor will have different perspectives than a president of a
company. While the former will stress work schedules and production quotas, the latter may have in
purview long-term corporate growth. The most typical hierarchical conflict is obtained between labor and
management groups.

D. Functional Conflict: Functional conflict arises from organizational framework.

For example, the production division may stress its own goals of long production runs and standardized
products with a view to meet unit cost goals. Contrarily, the marketing department stresses longer time
perspective, evaluates products and services from the customers’ standpoint and suggests several options to
satisfy different types of customer’s requirements.

E. Line-staff Conflict: Line-staff conflict arises from within the organizational structure. While staff
personnel are responsible in their positions for evaluating, monitoring, analyzing and projecting the work
and results of the enterprise, line personnel are prone to reach a ‘workable’ solution within the shortest time
span, with a view to attain the output without any interference.
The groups are equipped with divergent stereotypes towards each other. On the one hand, the line personnel
think that staff personnel are abstract, impractical, over-educated, inexperienced and young; on the other,
the staff personnel perceive their counterparts as unimaginative, dull, narrow-minded and inflexible. This
personality conflict is aggravated due to divergent criteria for goal attainment in the
organization. While the staff is evaluated in terms of profession-orientation, the line has to be result-
oriented and is assessed accordingly.

9
2. Emergent Conflict: As Herbert points out, this type of conflict stems from personal and social
reasons in organizational settings, embracing informal and non-formal behavior. It has been classified as
individual versus informal group, formal-informal, status, and political conflict.

A. Individual versus Informal group conflict: Individual versus informal group conflict arises when an
individual seeks to satisfy his needs through his informal group which, in turn, demands utmost amount of
conformity or undesirable behavioral pattern. It may stem from his efforts to satisfy his needs by earning
more money and ignoring the group-determined production norms in a piece-rate system. Because of this
non-compliance with its norms, the group may punish him in many ways.

B. Formal-informal conflict: Formal-informal conflict is common at work. Informal organizations have

their own specific goals, norms and values, which may be quite opposed to those of the formal organization.
Thus, informal expectations may contradict formal economic expectations. In return for its monetary
rewards, formal organizations seek to maximize productive efforts of their members. However, the informal
system determines an acceptable level of output in line with its value of
acceptable behavior and restricts this effort of the members, with a view to satisfy its goal of belongingness
or solidarity, conserving energy for leisure activities or extending the total work for longer periods.

C. Status conflict: Status conflict is caused largely because of technological changes and initiation of
action. Seniority and age have ceased to act as the criteria for accomplishing higher status in this era of
technological growth. Young specialists may supersede senior persons in an enterprise because of their
expertise. The senior’s experience and status come into conflict while working under these young experts.
Likewise, status incongruence is caused on account of initiation of action in organizational settings.
For example, line personnel may think of staff advice as initiation of action on their part, and thus,
experience status conflict.

D. Political conflict: Political conflict arises when an individual or a group attempts to get ahead, regardless
of the means adopted to do so. Thus, in contradiction to the prescribed system of merit or seniority, an
individual may earn promotion by undermining the seniority or performance of another individual in an
informal or non-formal way. This causes a political conflict in the organization.

10
 The Conflict Process:

The conflict process can be seen as comprising five stages:

I. Potential opposition or Incompatibility,

II. Cognition and Personalization,
III. Intentions,
IV. Behavior
V. Outcomes

Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage V

Potential opposition Cognition and Intentions Behavior Outcomes
Or incompatibility personalization

Antecedent Perceived Conflict Increased

Conditions Conflict Handling Overt group
Communication Intentions Conflict performance
Structure -Competing -Party’s
Personal variables Felt -Collaborating behavior
Conflict -Compromising -Other’s Decreased
-Avoiding reaction group
-Accommodating performance

Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility:

The first step in the conflict process is the presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to
arise. For simplicity’s sake, these conditions (which also may be looked at as causes of sources of conflict)
have been condensed into three general categories:

1. Communication
2. Structure
3. Personal variables

1. Communication: A review of the research suggests that differing work connotations. Jargon, insufficient
exchange of information, and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to communication and
potential antecedent conditions to conflict. Evidence demonstrates that semantic difficulties arise as a result
of differences in training, selective perception, and inadequate information
about others. The potential for conflict increases when either too little or too much communication takes
place. Too much information as well as too little can lay the foundation for conflict.

2. Structure: The term structure used, in this context, to include variables such as size, degree of
specialization in the tasks assigned to group members, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibility,
leadership styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence between groups.
Research indicates that size and specialization act as forces to stimulate conflict. The larger the group and
the more specialized its activities, the greater the likelihood of conflict. Tenure and conflict have
11
been found to be inversely related. The potential for conflict tends to be greatest when group members are
younger and when turnover is high .The greater the ambiguity in precisely defining where responsibility for
action lies, the greatest the potential for conflict to emerge. Such jurisdictional ambiguities increase inter-
group fighting for control of resources and territory.
Diversity of goals among groups is a major source of conflict. There is some indication that a close style of
leadership – tight and continuous observation with general control of others’ behaviors – increases conflict
potential. Too much reliance on participation may also stimulate conflict. Research tends to confirm that
participation and conflict are highly correlated, apparently because participation encourages the promotion
of differences. Reward systems, too, are found to create conflict when one member’s gain is at another’s
expense.

3. Personal variables: The individual value systems that each person has and the personality characteristics
of each person as personal variable accounts for conflict .Even insignificant characteristics – the sound of
their voice, the smirk when they smiled, and their personality – annoyed you. When you have to work with
such individuals, there is often potential for conflict.
Individuals who are highly authoritarian and dogmatic, and who demonstrate low esteem – lead to potential
conflict. Value differences, for example, are the best explanation of such diverse issues as prejudices,
disagreements over one’s contribution to the group and the rewards one deserves, and assessments of
whether this particular book is any good.

Stage II. Cognition and Personalization:

If the condition cited in Stage I, negatively affect something that one party cares about, then the potential
for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized in the second stage. Therefore, one or more of the
parties must be aware of the existence of the antecedent conditions. As a result of this
perceived conflict and felt conflict takes place. Perceived conflict occurs due to the parties’
misunderstanding of each other’s true position. Such a conflict can be resolved by improving
communication between the parties. In the felt conflict level individuals become emotionally involved that
parties experience anxiety, tension, frustration, or hostility.

Stage II is important because it’s where conflict issues tend to be defined. This is the place in the process
where the parties decide what the conflict is about. Emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions. For
example, negative emotions have been found to produce over simplification of issues, reductions in trust,
and negative interpretations of the other party’s behavior. In contrast, positive feelings have been found to
increase the tendency to see potential relationships among the elements of a problem, to take a broader view
of the situation, and to develop more innovative solutions.

Stage III: Intentions:

Intentions: intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions and their overt behavior. These intentions
are decisions to act in a given way.

The following figure represents the primary conflict handling intentions – Using two dimensions:

1. Cooperativeness (degree to which one party attempts to satisfy other party’s concern)
2. Assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns)

12
Five conflict-handling intentions can be identified:

Competing (assertive and uncooperative),

Collaborating (assertive and cooperative),

Avoiding (unassertive and uncorporative),

Accommodating (unassertive and cooperative),

Compromising (midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness).

Competing: When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests, regardless on the impact on the
other parties to the conflict, he or she is competing. Examples include intending to achieve your goal at the
sacrifice of the other’s goal, attempting to convince another that your conclusion is correct and his or hers is
mistaken, and trying to make someone else accept blame for a problem.

Collaborating: When the parties to conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of all parties, we have
cooperation and the search for a mutually beneficial outcome. In collaborating the intention of the parties is
to solve the problem be clarifying differences rather than by accommodating various points of view.
Examples include attempting to find a win-win solution that allows both parties’ goals to be completely
achieved and seeking a conclusion that incorporates the valid insights of both parties.

Avoiding: A person may recognize that a conflict exists and want to withdraw from it or suppress it.
Examples of avoiding include trying to just ignore a conflict and avoiding others with whom you disagree.

13
Accommodation: When one party seeks to appease and opponent, that party may be willing to place the
opponent’s interests above his or her own. In other words, in order for the relationship to be maintained, one
party is willing to be self-sacrificing. We refer to this intention as accommodating.
Examples are a willingness to sacrifies your goals so the other party’s goal can be attained, supporting
someone else’s opinion despite your reservations about it and forgiving someone for an infraction and
allowing subsequent ones.

Compromising: When each party to the conflict seeks to give up some thing, sharing occurs resulting in a
compromised outcome. In compromising, there is no clear winner or loser. Rather there is a willing ness to
ration the object of the conflict and accept a solution that provides incomplete satisfaction of both parties
concerns. The distinguishing characteristic of compromising therefore is that each party intends to give up
something. Examples might be willingness to accept a raise of $1 an hour rather than $2, to acknowledge
partial agreement with a specific viewpoint, and to take partial blame for an infraction.

Stage IV: Behavior:

The behavior stage includes the statements, actions and reactions made by the conflicts parties.
For example you make a demand on me: I respond by arguing; you threaten me; I threaten you back; and so
on. All conflicts exist somewhere along this continuum. At the lower part of the continuum, we have
conflicts characterized subtler, indirect and highly controlled forms of tension. An illustration might be a
student questioning in class a point the instructor has just made. Conflict intensities escalate as they move
upward along the continuum until they become highly destructive. Strikes riots and wars clearly fall in this
upper range.

Conflict intensity continuum

Annihilatory Conflict Overt efforts to destroy the other party

Aggressiveness physical attacks

Threats and ultimatums

Assertive verbal attacks

Overt questioning or challenging of others

Minor disagreements or misunderstandings

No Conflict

14
Stage V: Outcomes:

The action – reaction interplay between the conflicting parties results in consequences.

Fundamental Outcomes: Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions, stimulates
creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group members, provides the medium
through which problems can be aired and tensions released and fosters an environment of self –evaluation
and change.
There is evidence indicating that conflict can also be positively related to productivity. For instance, it was
demonstrated that among established groups, performance tended to improve more when there was conflict
among members than when there was fairly close agreement. Research demonstrators that heterogeneity
among group and organization members can increase creativity, improve the quality of decisions, and
facilitate change by enhancing member flexibility.

Dysfunctional Outcomes: The destructive consequences a conflict upon a group or organization’s

performance is generally well known. A reasonable summary might state: Uncontrolled opposition breeds
discontent which acts to dissolve common ties, and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.Among
the more undesirable consequences are a retarding of communication, reductions in group cohesiveness, and
subordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting between members. At the extreme, conflict can
bring group functioning to a halt and potentially threaten the group’s survival.

15
Conflict Management Techniques

I. Conflict Resolution Techniques:

Problem Solving: Face to face meeting of the conflicting parties for the purpose of identifying the
problem and resolving it through open discussion.

Super-ordinate Goals: Creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the cooperation of each of
the conflicting parties.

Expansion of Resources: when a conflict is caused by the scarcity of resources-say money, promotion
opportunities, office space expansion of the resource can create a win-win solution.

Avoidance: Withdrawal from, or suppression of, the conflict.

Smoothing: Playing down differences while emphasizing common interests between the conflicting parties.

Compromise: Each party to the conflict gives up something of value.

Authoritative Command: Management uses its formal authority to resolve the conflict and then
communicates its desires to the parties involved.

Altering the human variable: Using behavioral change techniques such as human relations training to
alter attitudes and behaviors that cause conflict.

Altering the structural variables: Changing the formal organization structure and the interaction patterns
of conflicting parties through job redesign, transfers, creation of coordinating positions, and the like.

II. Conflict Stimulation Techniques:

Communication: Using ambiguous or threatening messages to increase conflict levels.

Bringing in Outsiders: Adding employees to a group whose backgrounds, values, attitudes, or managerial
styles differ from those of present members.

Restructuring the organization: Realigning work groups, altering rules and regulations, increasing
interdependence, and making similar structural changes to disrupt the status quo.

Appointing a devil’s advocate: Designating a critic to purposely argue against the majority positions held
by the group.

16