Conflict Management

Conflict Management
Photo: smbitsolutions.wordpress.com

Conflict may be a disagreement or misunderstanding with others or events. It may be over expectations, roles, goals, viewpoints etc. They also may be struggle between or among incompatible interests, needs, goals, people, ideas etc. It may also arise due to competition between individuals or groups for the same resources, positions, markets etc.

K W Thomas defines the term conflict as “a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affects, something that the first party cares about.

Conflicts are of different types within the organization, they are – 

ü  Intra-personal

ü  Inter –personal/intra-group

ü  Inter-group/intra-organizational

ü  Inter-organizational

Traditional Views on Conflict

1.        Conflict leads to loss of energy and effort, destroy assets and waste the resources.

2.        They are the results of improper policies and unreasonable goals.

3.        Conflicts are undesirable and should be avoided.

Modern Views

1.      Conflict encourages competition. They results in enhancing competency of individuals, groups and organizations.

2.      Conflict shows the aliveness of process, system, teams and organization.

3.      It creates challenge that helps to tap the unused potentialities.

4.      Conflicts up to moderate extent are highly desirable.

The important group process is how a group manages conflict. As a group performs its assigned tasks, disagreements inevitably arise. 

Conflict is perceived incompatible differences resulting in some form of interference or opposition. Whether the differences are real is irrelevant. If people in a group perceive that differences exist, then there is conflict.

 

Following are the three different views have evolved regarding conflict.

1. The traditional view of conflict argues that conflict must be avoided—that it indicates a problem within the group.
2.  Another view, the human relations view of conflict, argues that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome in any group and need not be negative, but has potential to be a positive force in contributing to a group’s performance.
3.  The third and most recent view, the interactionist view of conflict, proposes that not only can conflict be a positive force in a group but that some conflict is absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively. The interactionist view doesn’t suggest that all conflicts are good. Some conflicts— functional conflicts—are constructive and support the goals of the work group and improve its performance. Other conflicts—dysfunctional conflicts—are destructive and prevent a group from achieving its goals. Exhibit below (level of conflict and group performance) illustrates the challenge facing managers.

When is conflict functional and when is it dysfunctional?

Research indicates that managers need to look at the type of conflict. Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships. Process conflict refers to how the work gets done.

Research shows that relationship conflicts are almost always dysfunctional because the interpersonal hostilities increase personality clashes and decrease mutual understanding and the tasks don’t get done. On the other hand, low levels of process conflict and low-to-moderate levels of task conflict are functional. For process conflict to be productive, it must be minimal. Otherwise, intense arguments over who should do what may become dysfunctional and can lead to uncertainty about task assignments, increase the time to complete tasks, and result in members working at cross-purposes.

However, a low-to-moderate level of task conflict consistently has a positive effect on group performance because it stimulates discussion of ideas that help groups be more innovative. Because we don’t yet have a sophisticated measuring instrument for assessing whether conflict levels are optimal, too high, or too low, the manager must try to judge that intelligently.

Conflict between two groups or departments in an organization refers to intergroup conflict. Conflicts between employees and management are inter-group conflicts. Conflict between regulation and supervision group is an example of this conflict. It may arise due to –

ü  Overlapping roles

ü  Absence of cooperation

ü  Lack of comprehensive understanding

ü  Competition for sharing the same facilities

ü  Resource crunch

ü  Lack of open minded approach

ü  Absence of collaboration between/among groups

ü  More concern for group goals rather than organizational goals

ü  Resistance either to communicate or receive communication

The conflict may be intra-personal, inter-personal, intra-group, inter-group or intra-organizational in nature. These are discussed below:

Intra-personal Conflict: Intra personal conflict is also called the conflict within the individual. This type of conflict can be of two types:

(a) Value conflict: Every individual has to play certain roles, which conforms to his value system. However, there are certain situations when an individual may have to compromise on value system and beliefs. For example, finance manager of an organization, while submitting tax returns to the government may conceal some facts, which may go against his belief and value system. This situation may cause tension and conflict within the individual.

(b) Decision-making: Problem solving is one of the important jobs every individual has to undertake in work environment. Every problem has various courses open. At times it is difficult for a person to select an appropriate course of action. This situation causes conflict within the individual. He therefore will have to take decisions based on the past experience and the knowledge. It may be noted that decision-making has become simpler these days due to firstly; information technology where required data is available and secondly, group decision is the norm in most of the organizations.

Inter-personal Conflict

Inter-personal conflict relates to conflict between two or more individuals and is probably the most common and recognized form of conflict. Interpersonal conflict is caused due to disagreement over goals and objectives of the organization. These are heightened due to difference of opinion of individuals and when issues are not based on facts. Every organization is full of unresolved issues, problems and differing situations that lead to conflict. Conflict can also take place between one person of a group with another person of the same group or another group on issues relating to decision-making. Individuals may have a difference of opinion on selection of a particular course of action that will lead to disagreement and often result in the conflict. It is the merit of the issue, and willingness of members of the organization to accept the others point of view that will avoid the conflict situation.

Intra-Group Conflict

Intra-group conflict relates to values, status and roles played by an individual in the group and the group norms. Individual may want to remain in the group for social needs but may disagree with the methods and procedures followed by the group. The conflict may arise when social changes are incorporated in the group. When group faces new problems and when values are changed due to change in social environment. Intra-group conflict is like Inter-personal conflict except that the people involved in the conflict episode belong to a common group.

Inter-Group Conflict

Conflicts between different groups, sections and departments are called inter-group conflict. For example, conflict between production and sales departments over the quality being produced and the customer requirements. Inter-group conflict causes due to factors inherent to the organizational structure like independence, inconsistency in various policy matter, variance on promotion criteria, reward system and different standards being adopted for different sub-units and departments. Organizational objectives can only be achieved when all departments work towards attainment of organizational goals. This is possible when interactions between departments are smooth and cordial. Conflict can be avoided by better communication between departments, joint decision making, removing disparity in group goals and paying due respect and displaying concern for other group’s views.

Intra-Organizational Conflicts

Intra organizational conflict encompasses horizontal, vertical, line–staff and role based conflicts. Let us briefly study these situations.

Horizontal Conflict

Horizontal Conflict is caused due to incompatibility of goals, sharing limited resources and difference in time orientation. It leads to tension, misunderstanding and frustration on the part of both the parties. Horizontal conflict relates to employees or group at the same level. Organizational goal at implementation level vary from department to department. Finance department may not be able to spare additional amount as may be required by research and development department for new product development that may cause tension, misunderstanding between two individuals or departments. Individuals may not be able to meet the targets of production in given time due to variety of reason that may cause conflict with sales department as the latter would like to flood the market with their product to make the presence felt. It has been seen that due to increased interdependence of individuals or groups to carry out various functions, situations do arise where there is difference of opinion on issues that cause conflict between individuals or groups.

Vertical Conflict

Vertical conflict refers to conflicts that might take place between different levels of hierarchy. Conflicts between subordinates and superior occur due to incompatibility. It is generally caused because of differences in perception, value system, goals that may be assigned, cognition and difference in individual behaviour. Conflict is also caused due to inappropriate communication between individuals at two different levels.

Line and Staff Conflict

Line and staff conflict has been traditional. Line authority creates product and services and contributes directly towards the revenue generation while staff authority assists line authority and acts in advisory capacity. Staff and line authority have a different predispositions and goals. They have different skills and expertise. Since staff authority (managers) are in the chain of command and have a day to day access to the top boss, have a tendency to dictate terms to the line authority and usually disregard the working knowledge of the line authority. They have tendency to dominate and disregard the efforts put in by line authority managers. On the contrary staff managers have a technical knowhow and they are able to advice the line authority to cut down cost of production and save on wastage etc. Line authority does not like their advice at times. Staff managers get frustrated when their suggestions and ideas are not implemented by line managers and hence the cause for conflict. In the process the organizational goals are not achieved as per plans.

Role Conflict

A person in an organization has to perform various roles. Conflict arises when roles assigned to him have different expectation. ‘Time’ management may cause conflict. A person may be asked to take care of an additional section in the absence of section head. Value system in an organization is also a cause for conflict. Supervisor is asked to be honest while he is dealing with sale of the product while the same person may be asked to pay commission to an official from whom a sanction is required to be obtained, thereby causing a conflict situation in the ethical value system of an individual. When an individual is line or a staff employee and also a union representative, has to perform duties of conflicting nature hence a role conflict.

Strategies to reduce Intergroup Conflict

ü  Avoidance: Keep the conflict from surfacing at all.

ü  Diffusion: Deactivate the conflict and cool off the emotions and hostilities of the groups.

ü  Containment: Allow some conflict to surface and contain it carefully by pointing out which issues are to be discussed and how they are to be resolved.

ü  Confrontation: Bring all issues out into the open and allow the conflict groups to confront directly in an attempt to reach a mutually satisfactory solution.

ü  Believe and create Win-Win situations: The groups should have belief and advantages in Win-Win situations as they help both the groups in particular and the organization in general.

ü  Information sharing: The departments in the company should share the information and data available with each other for the overall organization development.

ü  Free flow of communication: The groups should allow their members to communicate with each other freely.

ü  Trust and confidence: Each group should have trust and confidence in other group.

ü  Collaboration: Teach the groups about total organizational productivity, profitability and effectiveness and encourage collaboration, among all groups and avoid excess organizational politicking.

ü  Team building: Build interdepartmental teams and encourage the people to work beyond their departmental boundaries.

ü  Realise that organizational goals are superior to group goals.

.............................................................................

When group conflict levels are too high, managers can select from five conflict management options: avoidance, accommodation, forcing, compromise, and collaboration. (See Exhibit below for a description of these techniques.)

Keep in mind that no one option is ideal for every situation. Which approach to be used depends upon the circumstances.

Have you ever been part of a class group in which all teammates received the same grade even though some team members didn’t fulfill their responsibilities? How did that make you feel? Did it create conflict within the group and did you feel that the process and outcome were unfair?

Recent research also has shown that organizational justice or fairness is an important aspect of managing group conflict. How group members feel about how they’re being treated both by each other within the group and by outsiders can affect their work attitudes and behaviors. To promote the sense of fairness, it’s important that group leaders build a strong sense of community based on fair and just treatment.

Avoidance

One or both parties could avoid facing the conflict. The situation pertains to un-cooperative and unassertive behavior on the part of parties involved. A Party may avoid facing B Party. When situation reaches a point of negligence by A Party, B Party may take advantage of the situation. By avoiding, the individual might side step, postpone or even withdraw from the conflictuating situation. This strategy is useful when issues involved in conflict are of a very minor nature or when more important issues deserve attention. This strategy own concerns. Avoidance strategy should be applied when one feels that people in the organization should cool down so that the issue can be handled at a later date in a better psychological environment. The issue can also be postponed if additional information is required to be obtained. Avoidance is a poor strategy hence if someone else is able to handle the situation of conflict more effectively, should be allowed to do so. Managers having high score on avoidance as a strategy of conflict management, may suffer from delayed decision making and hence the loss to the organization. Those who have a low score on avoidance thereby wanting to attend to every single issue may spend lot of time on every trivial issue, hurt people’s feelings and stir hostility in the organization that should be taken care of.

Competing (Forcing)

This strategy may be adopted when other strategies of conflict resolution are not workable. Competing is also useful in emergencies where quick decisions are required. In this strategy power must be used unilaterally as a weapon when unpopular decisions like termination, pay cuts, layoffs, cost cutting and enforcing discipline are required to be taken. This strategy is based on win-lose principle of managing conflicts. The managers who are high on power base have an added advantage in using competing strategy because people from opposite side would not dare confront a person who is so powerful. There is a tendency that managers using this strategy should be careful about ‘yes’ men around them. They should identify conflicting situations and take bold decisions based on win-lose strategy. On the other hand there are managers who are low on competing mode, are likely to feel powerless in many situations. Not realizing that though they have power but they are not comfortable using it. By trying to use power, one could enhance one’s achievement. Another drawback in scoring low is that such individuals find it difficult to take bold stand on various issues concerning organizations. In situations when a manager is very low on ‘concern for the people’ may postpone vital decisions on matters pertaining to subordinates that may be detrimental to organizational effectiveness.

Collaborating

Strategy of collaboration involves attempt of one party to work with the other party in cooperative manner and find solutions to the problem for mutual benefits. The strategy involves identification of areas of disagreement, examining the issue in greater detail and a workable solution arrived at, which is for mutual benefit. This strategy signifies when two sets of solutions are important for both parties to be compromised. Hence, finding integrated solution becomes imperative. This strategy signifies joint efforts, gain for both parties and integrated solutions arrived at by consensual decisions.

Sekaran concluded that when people are high on collaborating, they have to be concerned about how they spend their time and other organizational resources. Collaboration is time and energy consuming. Not all situations need collaborative solutions. Over use of collaboration and consensual decision-making may reflect risk aversion tendencies or an inclination to defuse responsibility. When people score low on collaborating, they may fail to capitalize on situations, which would benefit immensely from joint problem solving. Also by ignoring the concerns of employees, decisions and policies may be evolved, which make the organizational members both unhappy and uncommitted to the system. The strategy attempts a win— win solution to their goals

Accommodating

In accommodating mode a person scarifies his own interest for accommodating other person’s interest. It is form of selfless generosity, obeying other person’s point of view. This mode is usually adopted when other person’s view is stronger, you want to achieve goodwill and indicate that you are reasonable. This strategy of conflict resolution is important when you want other person to give at a later date when it favors you.

Sekaran concluded that when people are high on accommodating score they might be differing too much to the wishes of others and pay very little attention to their own ideas and concern even though they may realize that they are not getting the attention they deserve. This might even lower one’s self esteem in addition to depriving on the influence, respect and recognition from others, since it negates the potential contribution that individuals are capable of making to the organization. While individual low on accommodating score, they should start thinking about whether they lack the goodwill of others and whether others perceive them as unreasonable, uncompromising, rigid and demanding.

Compromising

In conflict situation, compromising is a mode when both parties try to find out some expedient, mutually acceptable solution that sacrifices both the parties partially. In compromising, there is no clear winner or loser. None of the party is fully satisfied as they ration the object of conflict and accept the solution which is not complete to either of the parties. In compromising, there is a possibility of an atmosphere of ‘gamesmanship’ in the work environment. There is also a possibility of compromising on certain principles of behavior which is not desirable. Values, ethics, principles and long term objectives of the organization must be protected while adopting compromising.

When people are tough to compromise, they find it hard to make concessions and land up in power struggle that must be avoided. Compromising policies can easily be adopted when competing or collaboration strategy fails. Research indicates that people have underlying disposition to handle conflict in certain ways. Especially individuals have preferences among the five conflict handling intensions. Their preferences tend to be relied upon quite consistently, and a person’s intensions can be predicted rather well from a combination of intellectual and personality characteristics. When confronting conflict situation, some people want to win it at any cost, some wants to find an optimum solution, some want to run away, others want to be obliging, and still others want to “split the differences”.

Reference:

Robbins, S.P. (2009). Organizational Behavior. New Delhi: Pearson Education