Conflict and Negotiation in the Workplace

Conflict and Negotiation in the Workplace

Conflict: 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 ◦ More job dissatisfaction, turnover, stress ◦ Less productivity, information sharing

1970s to 1990s

– belief in an optimal level of conflict Some conflict is good because: ◦ Energizes debate ◦ Re-examine assumptions ◦ Improves responsiveness to external environment ◦ Increases team cohesion

Emerging View: Task Versus Relationship Conflict

• Constructive (task-oriented) conflict • Parties focus on the issue while maintaining respect for people having other points of view. • Try to understand the logic and assumptions of each position
• Relationship conflict • Parties focus on personal characteristics (not issues) as the source of conflict. • Try to undermine each other’s worth/competence • Accompanied by strong negative emotions (drive to defend)

Is Conflict Good or Bad? Emerging View

Goal: encourage constructive conflict, minimize relationship conflict

Problem: difficult to separate constructive from relationship conflict ◦ Drive to defend activated when ideas are critiqued

Three conditions that minimize relationship conflict while engaging in constructive conflict

1. Emotional intelligence 2. Cohesive team 3. Supportive team norms

The conflict process

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

Interdependence • Conflict increases with interdependence • Parties more likely to interfere with each other

Scarce Resources: Motivates competition for the resource

Ambiguous Rules • Creates uncertainty, threatens goals • Without rules, people rely on politics Communication Problems • Reliance on stereotyping • Lack of communication skills • Avoiding communication only increases the conflict

Conflict Handling Styles

Forcing = Win-lose orientation

◦ Belief that the more one party receives, the less the other receives

◦ Belief that resources are fixed

• Best when: – you have a deep conviction about your position – quick resolution required – other party would take advantage of cooperation
• Problems: relationship conflict, long-term relations

Avoiding

• Best when: – conflict is emotionally-charged (relationship conflict) – conflict resolution cost is higher than benefits
• Problems: doesn’t resolve conflict, frustration

Yielding

Completely giving in to the other’s wishes

• Best when: – other party has much more power – issue is much less important to you than other party – value/logic of your position is imperfect
• Problems: increases other’s expectations; imperfect solution

Compromising

◦ Best when: ◦ Parties have equal power ◦ Quick solution is required ◦ Parties lack trust/openness ◦ Problem: Sub-optimal solution where mutual gains are possible

Problem solving = Win-win orientation

◦ Belief that parties will find a mutually beneficial solution ◦ Belief that resources are expandable and not fixed

• Best when: – Interests are not perfectly opposing – Parties have trust/openness – Issues are complex
• Problem: other party may use information to its advantage

Cultural and Gender Differences in Conflict Handling Styles

Culture ◦ People from collective cultures –where group goals are valued more than individual goals- are motivated to maintain harmonious relations inside their group.

Gender ◦ Compared to men, women pay more attention to the relationship between the two parties. Women tend to adopt a compromising or problem solving style and are slightly more likely to use the avoiding style. ◦ Men tend to be more competitive and take a short-term orientation to the relationship.

Structural Approaches to Conflict Management

Emphasize superordinate goals

◦ Emphasize common objective rather than conflicting sub-goals ◦ Reduces goal incompatibility and differentiation

Reduce differentiation

◦ Remove sources of different values, attitudes and experiences ◦ e.g., move employees around to different jobs

Improve communication/ understanding

◦ Employees understand and appreciate each other’s views through communication – Contact hypothesis

◦ Warning: Apply communication/understanding after reducing differentiation

• Reduce interdependence • Combine tasks • Use buffers
• Increase resources
• Clarify rules and procedures • Clarify resource distribution

Resolving Conflict Through Negotiation:  refers to decision making situations in which two or more interdependent parties attempt to reach an agreement.

Distributive: Or “claiming value”. When the goals of two or more people are zero-sum so that one can gain only at the other’s expense.

Integrative: Or “creating value”. When parties’ goals are linked, but not zero-sum, so that one person’s goal achievement does not block the goal achievement of another.

Strategies for Claiming Value

Claiming value: Aiming for the best possible outcomes for yourself and your constituents.

1. Prepare and set goals
2. Manage first offers and concessions
3. Manage time ◦ Avoid time pressure on you (ex.: exploding offer). ◦ Avoid escalation of commitment effect
4. Know your BATNA negotiation (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) ◦ cost of ending – can you reach these outcomes another way? If so, you have power

Situational Influences on Negotiation

• Location – easier to negotiate on own turf
• Physical setting – seating arrangements, formality, etc.
• Audience – when there is an audience, negotiators become more competitive, they try to “save face”

Strategies for Creating Value

Creating value – use problem solving to help both parties reach the best outcomes.

1. Gather information • Understand other party’s needs/expectations
2. Discover other party’s priorities through offers and concessions • Make multi-issue proposals 3. Build the relationship (trustworthiness) • Common backgrounds, manage first impressions, maintaining positive emotions, act reliably

Managers prefer inquisitional strategy, but not usually best approach

• Often not enough information about the problem is collected
• Employees see it as unfair because they had no control over process

Mediation potentially offers highest satisfaction with process and outcomes