Conflict and Negotiation

Director: Pro. Vivian Chen

Reporter: Setyabudi Indartono (9644104605)

Course:

Seminar in Organization Behavior

Chapter 15

By

Stephen P. Robbins &

Timothy A. Judge

Learning Objective

1. Define Conflict2. Differentiate between the traditional, human

relation, and inter actionist views of Conflict3. Contrast task, relationship and process conflict4. Outline the conflict process5. Describe the five conflict-handling intention6. Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining7. Identify the five steps in the negotiation

process8. Describe cultural differences in negotiation

Define Conflict

Conflict

A process that bargain when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about

Differentiate between the traditional, human relation, and inter actionist views of Conflict

Conflict viewed by :

the belief that

traditional All conflict is harmful and must be avoided

human relation

Conflict is natural and inevitable outcome in any group

inter actionist

Is not only a positive force in a group but that is also an absolute necessary for a group to perform effectively

Contrast task, relationship and process conflict

Inter actionist conflict views propose:• Functional conflict: Conflict that supports the goals of the

group and improves its performance

• Dysfunctional conflict: Conflict that hinders group performance

Conflict type:• Task Conflict: Conflict over content and goals of the work

• Relationship conflict: Conflict based on interpersonal relationship

• Process Conflict: Conflict over how work gets done

Creating functional conflict

Regarding to the inter actionist view of conflict, conflict can be created toward function, through reward dissent and punish conflict avoider

Encourage people to challenge the system and develop fresh ideas

• By Reward system dissenters (Hewlett Packard)• By Criticize the bosses (Herman miller inc)• By Build evil’s advocates (GE & Anheuser-

Busch)

Most studies demonstrate that

1. Relational conflict always dysfunctional.

2. Low level of process conflict are functional

3. Low to moderate level task conflict are functional (dysfunctional when create uncertainty task role, increase complete task time, member working cross purposes)

Type low moderate High

Task Functional

Relation Dysfunctional

Process Functional

Outline the conflict process

Conflict ProcessStage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage

4Stage

5Potential opposition on

incompatibility

(presence condition that create opportunity for

conflict to arise)

Cognition and personalization (when conflict issue tend to be define,

parties decide what the

conflict is about)

Intention (Decision to act in a given way)

Behavior (statements, actions, reactions )

Outcomes

Antecedent conditions:- Communication: Differing

word connotations, jargon, insufficient exchange of information, noise

- Structure: Size and degree of specialization, jurisdiction clarify, (BU) goal compatibility, leadership style, reward system, degree of dependence

- Personal Variables: Personality, emotion, value

Perceive Conflict: awareness by one or more parties of the existence of condition that create opportunities for conflict to arise

Felt Conflict: Emotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety, tenseness, frustration or hostility

Conflict handling intentions (Assertiveness-Cooperativeness):

1.Competing

2.Collaborating

3.Compromising

4.Avoiding

5.Accommodating

Overt Conflict:

• party’s Behavior

• Other’s reaction

Increased group performance

Decreased group performance

Describe the five conflict-handling intention

Conflict handling intentions:

1. Competing “ a desire to satisfy one’s interests, regardless of the impact on the other party to the conflict” Assertive but uncooperative

2. Collaborating “A situation in which the parties to a conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of all parties” Assertive and Cooperative

3. Compromising “A Situation in which each party to a conflict is willing to give up something” middle in both Assertive and Cooperative

4. Avoiding “ The desire to withdraw from or suppress a conflict” unassertive and uncooperative

5. Accommodating “ the willingness of one party in a conflict to place the opponent’s interest above his or her own” Unassertive and Cooperative

Conflict intensity continuum (behavior)(Functional to dysfunctional conflict)

1. No conflict2. Minor disagreement or misunderstanding3. Overt questioning or challenging of

others4. Assertive verbal attacks5. Threats and ultimatums6. Aggressive physical attack7. Overt effort to destroy the other party

Conflict Managementthe use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve the desire level of conflict

1. Assertiveness vs. Cooperativeness

2. Conflict resolution technique

3. Conflict stimulation technique

1.Competing Assertive but uncooperative2.Collaborating Assertive and Cooperative3.Compromising middle in both Assertive and cooperative4.Avoiding unassertive and uncooperative5.Accommodating Unassertive and Cooperative

1. Problem solving2. Super ordinates goals3. Expansion of resources4. Avoiding 5. Smoothing6. compromise7. Authoritative command8. Altering the human variable9. Altering the structural variable•Communication•Bringing in outsider•Restructuring the organization•Appointing a devil’s advocate

Conflict Outcomes

1. Functional Outcomes• Improve decision quality• Stimulate creativity and innovative• Encourages interest and curiosity among group member• Provide the medium through which problems can be aired

and tension released• Foster an environment of self evaluation and change

2. Dysfunctional Outcomes• Retarding of communication• Reduction in group cohesiveness• Subordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting

among member• Bring group functioning to a halt and potentially threaten

the group’s survival

NEGOTIATION

A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them

Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining

Bargaining Strategies

• distributive bargaining: Negotiation that seek to divide up a fix amount of resources; a win lose situation

– Good cop and bad cop tactic– Revealing deadline tactic

• integrative bargaining: Negotiation that seek one or more settlement that can create a win-win solution

Identify the five steps in the negotiation process

negotiation process

1. Preparation and planning: Answer some questions (conflict nature, conflict history, involved negotiation, negotiation goals, the other party’s goal, and the others party’s information) and develop negotiation strategy

2. Definition of ground rules: Who will do the negotiating, when, where, limited issues, any specifics procedures? etc

3. Clarification and justification: explain, amplify, clarify, bolster, and justify the original demand

4. Bargaining and problem solving: give and take in trying to hash out an agreement

5. Closure and implementation: Formalizing the agreement

NEGOTIATION ISSUES

• The role of mood and personality traits in negotiation: Negotiator in positive moods negotiate better outcomes then in average one. ‘easier’ to predict opponent negotiation tactics when we know their personality (high risk taker used aggressive bargainer, best distributive bargainer is disagreeable introvert, checked ego better negotiator than big ego)

• Gender different in negotiation Women: more cooperative and pleasant, nicer in negotiation, (managerial women) less confidence in anticipation of negotiation an less satisfied with their negotiation performance, more arraign them selves.

• Culture different in negotiation

Describe cultural differences in negotiation

Culture different in negotiation

• French like conflict, • Chinese draw out in negotiation, • Chinese and Japanese like develop a relationship and

communication (adapted to the situation), • North American tend on fact and appealing to logic and

important deadline, • Arab tend to appealing to Emotion and deadline very casual, • Russian based on ideal and ignore deadline. • Different tactics of north America, Japanese and Brazilian on

said “No”, silent lasting, interruption, and physical contact.

Third party negotiations

• Mediator: a neutral third party who facilitate a negotiated solution by using reasoning, persuasion and suggestion s 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

Manager Implication

• Optimal enough conflict: prevent stagnation, stimulate creativity, allow tension to be released, initiate the seeds for change

• Inadequate or excessive conflict: reduce satisfaction of member, increase absence and turnover rates, lover productivity

• Reduce excessive conflict– Competition, when quick

– Collaboration, to find integrative solutions

– Avoidance, when issue is trivial, or more important issues are pressing

– Accommodation, when you find you wrong, and to allow a better position to be heard

– Compromise, when goals are important

Another research shows:

• Results indicate significant differences between the two groups. Middle management prefers the assertive styles (competing and collaborating) with scant attention to cooperation, while junior management primarily uses the avoiding style, which is both uncooperative and un assertive..(A. D. Slabbert Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author Faculty of Management, Cape Technikon, P.O. Box 652, Cape Town, South Africa)

• when feedback was an issue, a case was two times more likely to settle. And resolution would be more likely when the filer was a buyer rather than a seller (STICKS AND STONES:LANGUAGE, FACE, AND ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION, JEANNE M. BRETT, Northwestern University….., Academy Management Journal 2007, Vol. 50, No. 1, 85–99.)

Another research shows:• Negotiation beliefs have the potential to predict and explain negotiation

performance, implicit negotiation beliefs had a direct causal effect on negotiators' ability to capture their share of the bargaining pie, negotiators' beliefs about the malleability of negotiation ability have powerful and predictable effects on how resources are claimed and created at the bargaining table (Kray LJ, Haselhuhn MP, Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 0022-3514, 2007 Jul, Vol. 93, Issue 1)

• a self-affirmation unrelated to an identity challenged by a counter attitudinal communication or divisive negotiation decreases bias and increases open-mindedness to the communication and to pragmatic negotiation compromise (Bridging the Partisan Divide: Self-Affirmation Reduces Ideological Closed-Mindedness and Inflexibility in Negotiation. By: Cohen, Geoffrey L., Sherman, David K., Bastardi, Anthony, Hsu, Lillian, McGoey, Michelle, Ross, Lee, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 00223514, Sep2007, Vol. 93, Issue 3)

• an interdependent self-construal could lead to more positive behavior on the part of the high-powered individual, even in a heated hour-long dispute, people may often be aware that they are using their power in a manner that is unfair to a low-power party (The role of the self-concept and the social context in determining the behavior of power holders: Self-construal in inter group versus dyadic dispute resolution negotiations. By: Howard, Elizabeth Seeley, Gardner, Wendi L., Thompson, Leigh, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 00223514, 20071001, Vol. 93, Issue 4

)

ThanksFor your Attentions

notes(1) Ok class, this chapter discuses about conflict and negotiation(2) This chapter has some of learning objective are:(3) Before we discus more about conflict and negotiation. I’d like to frame the definition of

conflict first. The conflict define as……(4) There are three general view of conflict. Traditional view, human relation and inter

actionist view.(5) Inter actionist conflict views, it’s propose ….. And there are 3 type of conflict are:……

Vivian would you give examples of these ones? Type of conflict(6) There are examples how to create functional conflict as inter actionist view of conflict(7) Relational conflict always dysfunctional. it appears that the friction and interpersonal

hostilities inherent in relationship conflict increase personality clashes and decrease mutual understanding which hinder the completion of organization task ….. Low level of process conflict are functional ………… Low to moderate level task conflict are functional (dysfunctional when create uncertainty task role, increase complete task time, member working cross purposes) demonstrate positive affect to group performance because it stimulates discussion of ideas that helps group perform betters

(10) Intensity degree from No conflict behavior mean functional to over effort to destroy the other party behavior as dysfunctional

(11) I thinks that this point is very interesting to develop research in OB. We can collaborate with personality trait, organizational environment, etc to get a functional conflict outcomes. At the last slide I’ll show some the recent research in conflict and negotiation

(13) And the second part of this chapter we discus about negotiation that describe as…(14) In this chapter we use negotiation term interchangeability to bargaining term. There are

two general strategy of bargaining are:…