Page 1
Kelli J. SchutteWilliam Jewell College
Robbins, Judge, and Vohra
Organizational Behavior14th Edition
Conflict and NegotiationConflict and Negotiation
14-1Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 2
Chapter Learning ObjectivesChapter Learning Objectives
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:– Define conflict.
– Differentiate between the traditional, resolution focused, and interactionist views of conflict.
– Outline the conflict process.
– Define negotiation.
– Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
– Apply the five steps in the negotiation process.
– Show how individual differences influence negotiations.
– Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations.
– Describe cultural differences in negotiations.
14-2Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 3
Conflict DefinedConflict Defined
A process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about– That point in an ongoing activity when an interaction
“crosses over” to become an interparty conflict
Encompasses a wide range of conflicts that people experience in organizations– Incompatibility of goals
– Differences over interpretations of facts
– Disagreements based on behavioral expectations
14-3Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 4
THE TRADITIONAL VIEW OF CONFLICT THE INTERACTIONIST VIEW OF CONFLICT MANAGED CONFLICT VIEW
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-4
Transitions in Conflict ThoughtTransitions in Conflict Thought
Page 5
THE TRADITIONAL VIEW OF CONFLICT
The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be avoided
Conflict was bad and to be avoided
it was viewed negatively and discussed with such terms as VIOLENCE,DESTRUCTION and IRRATIONALITY to reinforce its negative connotation
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-5
Page 6
THE INTERACTIONIST VIEW OF CONFLICT
the belief that conflict is not only a positive force ina group but also an absolute necessity for a group to perform effictively
It encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious peaceful,tranquil,and cooperative group is porne to becoming,apathetic,and unresposive to needs for change and innovation.
functional conflict
dysfunctional conflict
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-6
Page 7
Forms of Interactionist ConflictForms of Interactionist Conflict
14-7Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 8
Types of Interactionist ConflictTypes of Interactionist Conflict
Task Conflict– Conflicts over content and goals of the work
– Low-to-moderate levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL
Relationship Conflict– Conflict based on interpersonal relationships
– Almost always DYSFUNCTIONAL
Process Conflict– Conflict over how work gets done
– Low levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL
14-8Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 9
The Conflict ProcessThe Conflict Process
We will focus on each step in a moment…
14-9
E X H I B I T 14-1E X H I B I T 14-1
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 10
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-10
Page 11
Stage I: Potential Opposition or IncompatibilityStage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility
Communication– Semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, over communication and
“noise”
Structure– Size and specialization of jobs
– Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity
– Member/goal incompatibility
– Leadership styles (close or participative)
– Reward systems (win-lose)
– Dependence/interdependence of groups
Personal Variables– Differing individual value systems
– Personality types
14-11Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 12
Stage II: Cognition and PersonalizationStage II: Cognition and Personalization
Important stage for two reasons:
1. Conflict is defined • Perceived Conflict
– Awareness by one or more parties of the existence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise
2. Emotions are expressed that have a strong impact on the eventual outcome• Felt Conflict
– Emotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety, tenseness, frustration, or hostility
14-12Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 13
Stage III: IntentionsStage III: Intentions
Intentions– Decisions to act in a given way– Note: behavior does not always accurately reflect intent
Dimensions of conflict-handling intentions:– Cooperativeness
• Attempting to satisfy the other party’sconcerns
– Assertiveness• Attempting to satisfy
one’s own concerns
14-13
E X H I B I T 14-2E X H I B I T 14-2
Source: K. Thomas, “Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations,” in M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., vol. 3 (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992), p. 668. Arrows added. Used with permission.
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 14
Stage IV: BehaviorStage IV: Behavior
Conflict Management
– The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve the desired level of conflict
Conflict-Intensity Continuum
14-14
E X H I B I T 14-3E X H I B I T 14-3
Source: Based on S.P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 93–97; and F. Glasi, “The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of Third Parties,” in G.B.J. Bomers and R. Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management and Industrial Relations (Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982), pp. 119–40.
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 15
Conflict Management TechniquesConflict Management Techniques Conflict Resolution
Techniques– Problem solving– Superordinate goals– Expansion of resources– Avoidance– Smoothing– Compromise– Authoritative command– Altering the human
variable– Altering the structural
variables
Conflict Stimulation Techniques
– Bringing in outsiders– Communication– Restructuring the
organization– Appointing a devil’s
advocate
14-15
SEE E X H I B I T 14-4SEE E X H I B I T 14-4
Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 59–89
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 16
Stage V: OutcomesStage V: Outcomes Functional
– Increased group performance
– Improved quality of decisions
– Stimulation of creativity and innovation
– Encouragement of interest and curiosity
– Provision of a medium for problem solving
– Creation of an environment for self-evaluation and change
Dysfunctional– Development of discontent
– Reduced group effectiveness
– Retarded communication
– Reduced group cohesiveness
– Infighting among group members overcomes group goals
Managing Functional Conflict– Reward dissent and punish
conflict avoiders
14-16Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 17
NegotiationNegotiation
Negotiation (Bargaining)– A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them
Two General Approaches:– Distributive Bargaining
• Negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed amount of resources; a win-lose situation
– Integrative Bargaining• Negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create
a win-win solution
14-17Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 18
Distributive versus Integrative BargainingDistributive versus Integrative Bargaining
Bargaining Characteristic Distributive Bargaining
Integrative Bargaining
Goal Get all the pie you can Expand the pie
Motivation Win-Lose Win-Win
Focus Positions Interests
Information Sharing Low High
Duration of Relationships Short-Term Long-Term
14-18
SEE E X H I B I T 14-5SEE E X H I B I T 14-5
Distributive
Integrative
Source: Based on R. J. Lewicki and J. A. Litterer, Negotiation (Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1985), p. 280.
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 19
The Negotiation ProcessThe Negotiation Process
BATNA
– The Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement
– The lowest acceptable value (outcome) to an individual for a negotiated agreement
14-19
E X H I B I T 14-7E X H I B I T 14-7
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 20
Individual Differences in Negotiation EffectivenessIndividual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness
Personality Traits– Extroverts and agreeable people are weaker at distributive
negotiation; disagreeable introverts are best– Intelligence is a weak indicator of effectiveness
Mood and Emotion– Ability to show anger helps in distributive bargaining– Positive moods and emotions help integrative bargaining
Gender– Men and women negotiate the same way, but may
experience different outcomes
14-20Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 21
Third-Party NegotiationsThird-Party Negotiations Four Basic Third-Party Roles
– Mediator• A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using
reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions for alternatives
– Arbitrator• A third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an
agreement.
– Conciliator• A trusted third party who provides an informal communication
link between the negotiator and the opponent
– Consultant• An impartial third party, skilled in conflict management, who
attempts to facilitate creative problem solving through communication and analysis
14-21Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 22
Global ImplicationsGlobal Implications
Conflict and Culture– Indian and French managers view conflict differently
– Indian managers are more likely to use accommodation and avoidance while French managers are likely to use competing tactics.
Cultural Differences in Negotiations– Multiple cross-cultural studies on negotiation styles, for
instance:• American negotiators are more likely than Japanese bargainers
to make a first offer
• North Americans use facts to persuade; Arabs use emotion; and Russians use asserted ideals
• Brazilians say “no” more often than Americans or Japanese
14-22Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 23
Summary and Managerial ImplicationsSummary and Managerial Implications Conflict can be
constructive or destructive
Reduce excessive conflict by using:– Competition– Collaboration– Avoidance– Accommodation– Compromise
Integrative negotiation is a better long-term method
14-23
E X H I B I T 14-8E X H I B I T 14-8
Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e
Page 24
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the
United States of America.
Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
14-24Copyright © 2012 Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. LtdAuthorized adaptation from the United States edition of Organizational Behavior, 14e