INTRODUCTION TO CONFLICTS

MEANING

Conflicts are endemic to human society. Our workplace is so often

infected by grudges, rumours, grumbling, criticism, sarcasm,

unpleasant comments, gossips and politicking that it leads to an

atmosphere of suspicion, mistrust and negativity. Sometimes, the

circumstances become so difficult that employees do not even like

to see each other’s face, leave aside work together. It spreads to

the personal level leading to the mixing of personal and professional

lives and annihilating the organizational harmony. Meanwhile, there

are companies where employees love to work because they can

express their feelings to their colleagues and trust their organization

and its leadership. In such places, mutual help takes top priority

among employees. The bonding becomes so strong the employees

feel like a “family”. Such employees make a better team as they

respect their organizations and take utmost interest in their tasks.

DEFINITION

Coser 1956

Social conflict is a struggle between opponents over values and

claims to scarce status, power and resources.

Schelling 1960

Conflicts that are strategic are essentially bargaining situations in

which the ability of one participant to gain his ends is dependent on

the choices or decisions that the other participant will make.

1

Deutsch 1973

A conflict exists whenever incompatible activities occur . . . one

party is interfering, disrupting, obstructing, or in some other way

making another party's actions less effective.

Wall 1985

Conflict is processes in which two or more parties attempt to

frustrate the other's goal attainment . . . the factors underlying

conflict are threefold: interdependence, differences in goals, and

differences in perceptions.

Pruitt and Rubin 1986

Conflict means perceived divergence of interest, or a belief that the

parties' current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously.

Conrad 1990

Conflicts are communicative interactions among people who are

interdependent and who perceive that their interests are

incompatible, inconsistent, or in tension.

Tjosvold and van de Vliert 1994

Conflict--incompatible activities-- occurs within cooperative as well

as competitive contexts . . . conflict parties' can hold cooperative or

competitive goals.

Poole, and Stutman 1997

Conflict is the interaction of interdependent people who perceive

incompatible goals and interference from each other in achieving

those goals.

2

WHY LEARN MORE ABOUT CONFLICT AND

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT?

Listening, oral communication, interpersonal communication, and

teamwork rank near the top of skills that employers seek in their

new hires. When you learn to effectively manage and resolve

conflicts with others, then more opportunities for successful team

memberships are available to you. If we can learn to manage this

highly probable event called conflict (we average five conflicts per

day), then we are less apt to practice destructive behaviours that

will negatively impact our team.

Although conflict may be misunderstood and unappreciated,

research shows that unresolved conflict can lead to aggression.

Most of us use conflict skills that we observed growing up, unless we

have made a conscious effort to change our conflict management

style. Some of us observed good conflict management, while others

observed faulty conflict management. Most of us have several

reasons to improve our conflict-management skills.

Faculty members should help students develop their conflict

management skills. Most people do not resolve conflicts because

they either have a faulty skill set and/or because they do not know

the organization’s policy on conflict management. All team

members need to know their conflict styles, conflict intervention

methods, and strategies for conflict skill improvement.

3

HOW DO PEOPLE RESPOND TO

CONFLICT?

FIGHT OR FLIGHT

Physiologically we respond to conflict in one of two ways—we want

to “get away from the conflict” or we are ready to “take on anyone

who comes our way.” Think for a moment about when you are in

conflict. Do you want to leave or do you want to fight when a

conflict presents itself? Neither physiological response is good or

bad—it’s personal response. What is important to learn, regardless

of our initial physiological response to conflict, is that we should

intentionally choose our response to conflict.

Whether we feel like we want to fight or flee when a conflict arises,

we can deliberately choose a conflict mode. By consciously choosing

a conflict mode instead of to conflict, we are more likely to

productively contribute to solving the problem at hand. Below are

five conflict response modes that can be used in conflict.

4

WHAT MODES DO PEOPLE USE TO

ADDRESS CONFLICT?

All people can benefit, both personally and professionally, from

learning conflict management skills. Typically we respond to conflict

by using one of five modes:

• Competing

• Avoiding

• Accommodating

• Compromising

• Collaborating

Each of these modes can be characterized by two scales:

assertiveness and cooperation. None of these modes is wrong to

use, but there are right and wrong times to use each. The following

sections describe the five modes. The information may help each

team member to characterize her/his model for conflict

management.

HOW TO DISCERN YOUR CONFLICT MODE

The Thomas-Kidman Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)5 is a widely

used assessment for determining conflict modes. The assessment

takes less than fifteen minutes to complete and yields conflict

scores in the areas of avoiding, competing, compromising,

accommodating, and collaborating.

COMPROMISING

5

The compromising mode is moderate assertiveness and moderate

cooperation. Some people define compromise as “giving up more

than you want,” while others see compromise as both parties

winning.

Times when the compromising mode is appropriate are when you

are dealing with issues of moderate importance, when you have

equal power status, or when you have a strong commitment for

resolution. Compromising mode can also be used as a temporary

solution when there are time constraints.

COMPROMISING SKILLS

• Negotiating

• Finding a middle ground

• Assessing value

• Making concessions

ACCOMMODATING

The accommodating mode is low assertiveness and high

cooperation. Times when the accommodating mode is appropriate

are to show reasonableness, develop performance, create good will,

or keep peace. Some people use the accommodating mode when

the issue or outcome is of low importance to them.

The accommodating mode can be problematic when one uses the

mode to “keep a tally” or to be a martyr. For example, if you keep a

list of the number of times you have accommodated someone and

then you expect that person to realize, without your communicating

to the person, that she/he should now accommodate you.

ACCOMMODATING SKILLS

6

• Forgetting your desires

• Selflessness

• Ability to yield

• Obeying orders

COMPETING

The competing conflict mode is high assertiveness and low

cooperation. Times when the competing mode is appropriate are

when quick action needs to be taken, when unpopular decisions

need to be made, when vital issues must be handled, or when one is

protecting self-interests.

Competing Skills

• Arguing or debating

• Using rank or influence

• Asserting your opinions and feelings

• Standing your ground

• Stating your position clearly

AVOIDING

The avoiding mode is low assertiveness and low cooperation. Many

times people will avoid conflicts out of fear of engaging in a conflict

or because they do not have confidence in their conflict

management skills.

Times when the avoiding mode is appropriate are when you have

issues of low importance, to reduce tensions, to buy some time, or

when you are in a position of lower power.

Avoiding Skills

7

• Ability to withdraw

• Ability to sidestep issues

• Ability to leave things unresolved

COLLABORATING

Collaboration Skills

• Active listening

• No threatening confrontation

• Identifying

Collaborating mode is high assertiveness and high cooperation.

Collaboration has been described as “putting an idea on top of an

idea on top of an idea…in order to achieve the best solution to a

conflict.” The best solution is defined as a creative solution to the

conflict that would not have been generated by a single individual.

With such a positive outcome for collaboration, some people will

profess that the collaboration mode is always the best conflict mode

to use. However, collaborating takes a great deal of time and

energy.

Therefore, the collaborating mode should be used when the conflict

warrants the time and energy. For example, if your team is

establishing initial parameters for how to work effectively together,

then using the collaborating mode could be quite useful. On the

other hand, if your team is in conflict about where to go to lunch

today, the time and energy necessary to collaboratively resolve the

conflict is probably not beneficial.

Times when the collaborative mode is appropriate are when the

conflict is important to the people who are constructing an

integrative solution, when the issues are too important to

8

compromise, when merging perspectives, when gaining

commitment, when improving relationships, or when learning.

WHAT FACTORS CAN AFFECT OUR

CONFLICT MODES?

Some factors that can impact how we respond to conflict are listed

below with explanations of how these factors might affect us.

Gender: Some of us were socialized to use particular conflict

modes because of our gender. For example, some males, because

they are male, were taught “always stand up to someone, and, if

you have to fight, then fight.” If one was socialized this way he will

be more likely to use assertive conflict modes versus using

cooperative modes.

Self-concept: How we think and feel about ourselves affect how we

approach conflict. Do we think our thoughts, feelings, and opinions

are worth being heard by the person with whom we are in conflict?

Expectations: Do we believe the other person or our team wants

to resolve the conflict?

Situation: Where is the conflict occurring, do we know the person

we are in conflict with, and is the conflict personal or professional?

Position (Power): What is our power status relationship, (that is,

equal, more, or less) with the person with whom we are in conflict?

Practice: Practice involves being able to use all five conflict modes

effectively, being able to determine what conflict mode would be

9

most effective to resolve the conflict, and the ability to change

modes as necessary while engaged in conflict.

Determining the best mode: Through knowledge about conflict

and through practice we develop a “conflict management

understanding” and can, with ease and limited energy, determine

what conflict mode to use with the particular person with whom we

are in conflict.

Communication skills: The essence of conflict resolution and

conflict management is the ability to communicate effectively.

People who have and use effective communication will resolve their

conflicts with greater ease and success.

Life-experiences: Our life experiences, both personal and

professional, have taught us to frame conflict as either something

positive that can be worked through or something negative to be

avoided and ignored at all costs.

UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT

According to Oxford English Dictionary, conflict refers to a series of

disagreement or argument, incompatibility between opinions,

principles, etc. for example, “he had a dispute with his brother”, the

differences between political parties like “the familiar conflict

between the Congress and the BJP”. Use of words like dispute,

disagreement, incompatibility, and difference of opinion helps us to

understand that there is conflict. The core conflict lies in the

opposite interests of the involved parties. It is a state of disharmony

between incompatible persons, ideas or interests.

10

Conflicts are complex processes. There are three factors that

influence conflict. They are attitudes, behaviours and structures.

Each factor influences and is influenced by the others. Attitudes

include the parties’ perceptions and misperceptions of each other

and of themselves. These can be positive or negative. Behaviours

can include co operation or coercion, gestures signifying conciliation

or hostility. Violent conflict behaviour is characterized by threats,

coercion and destructive attacks. Structures refer to the

organizational mechanisms, processes and groups and influence

recognition and identify needs. Conflict is a dynamic process in

which structure, behaviour and attitudes are constantly changing

and influencing each other.

A conflict exists when two people wish to carry out acts that are

mutually inconsistent. They may both want to do the same thing,

such as eat the same mango, or they may want to do different

things where the different things are mutually incompatible, such as

they both want to stay together but while one wants to go to the

cinema hall the other wants to go to the library.

TYPES OF CONFLICT

Types of conflict are described as following:

1) GOAL CONFLICT

Conflict arises when an individual selects or is assigned goals that

are incompatible with each other. Goal incompatibility refers to the

extent to which an individual’s or group’s goals are at odds with one

another. For example, a student may set goals of earning Rs. 500 a

week and achieving an 8-grade point average (on a ten point

system) while being enrolled full time during the coming semester.

11

A month into the semester, the student may realize that there

aren’t enough hours in the week to achieve both the goals. The

student may then face a conflict because of difficulty in achieving

both the goals.

2) AFFECTIVE CONFLICT

It can be explained as the incompatible feelings and emotions within

the individual or between individuals. Interpersonal conflicts as well

as antagonism between groups are examples of affective conflict.

Most affective conflict is focussed on personalized anger or

resentment. The causes of affective conflict may be- equity

(fairness), dissatisfaction of social needs such as inclusion, control

and affection, emotional states and perceptions. Low performing

teams are often crippled by affective conflict. It lowers team

effectiveness.

3) COGNITIVE CONFLICT

It occurs when ideas and thoughts within an individual or between

individuals are incompatible. The effects of cognitive conflict are

mainly positive, like better higher productivity and more creativity.

Successful teams use a variety of techniques that help them keep

ideas separated from people. A hallmark of high performing teams

is their ability to critically consider and evaluate ideas.

4) PROCEDURAL CONFLICT

12

Procedural conflict exists when group members disagree about the

procedures to be followed in accomplishing the group goal. Union-

management negotiations often involve procedural conflicts before

the negotiations actually begin. The parties may have procedural

conflicts over who will be involved in the negotiations, where will

they take place, and when will the sessions be held. After

negotiations have been concluded, different interpretations about

how a grievance system is to operate provide another example of

procedural conflict.

5) Relationship Conflicts

Relationship conflicts occur because of the presence of strong

negative emotions, misperceptions or stereotypes, poor

communication or miscommunication, or repetitive negative

behaviors. Relationship problems often fuel disputes and lead to an

unnecessary escalating spiral of destructive conflict. Supporting the

safe and balanced expression of perspectives and emotions for

acknowledgment (not agreement) is one effective approach to

managing relational conflict.

6) Data Conflicts

Data conflicts occur when people lack information necessary to

make wise decisions, are misinformed, disagree on which data is

relevant, interpret information differently, or have competing

assessment procedures. Some data conflicts may be unnecessary

since they are caused by poor communication between the people

in conflict. Other data conflicts may be genuine incompatibilities

associated with data collection, interpretation or communication.

Most data conflicts will have "data solutions."

7) Interest Conflicts

13

Interest conflicts are caused by competition over perceived

incompatible needs. Conflicts of interest result when one or more of

the parties believe that in order to satisfy his or her needs, the

needs and interests of an opponent must be sacrificed. Interest-

based conflict will commonly be expressed in positional terms. A

variety of interests and intentions underlie and motivate positions in

negotiation and must be addressed for maximized resolution.

Interest-based conflicts may occur over-substantive issues (such as

money, physical resources, time, etc.); procedural issues (the way

the dispute is to be resolved); and psychological issues (perceptions

of trust, fairness, desire for participation, respect, etc.). For an

interest-based dispute to be resolved, parties must be assisted to

define and express their individual interests so that all of these

interests may be jointly addressed. Interest-based conflict is best

resolved through the maximizing integration of the parties'

respective interests, positive intentions and desired experiential

outcomes.

8) Structural Conflicts

Structural conflicts are caused by forces external to the people in

dispute. Limited physical resources or authority, geographic

constraints (distance or proximity), time (too little or too much),

organizational changes, and so forth can make structural conflict

seem like a crisis. It can be helpful to assist parties in conflict to

appreciate the external forces and constraints bearing upon them.

Structural conflicts will often have structural solutions. Parties'

appreciation that a conflict has an external source can have the

effect of them coming to jointly address the imposed difficulties.

9) Value Conflicts

Value conflicts are caused by perceived or actual incompatible belief

systems. Values are beliefs that people use to give meaning to their

14

lives. Values explain what is “good" or "bad," "right" or "wrong,"

"just" or "unjust." Differing values need not cause conflict. People

can live together in harmony with different value systems. Value

disputes arise only when people attempt to force one set of values

on others or lay claim to exclusive value systems that do not allow

for divergent beliefs. It is of no use to try to change value and belief

systems during relatively short and strategic mediation

interventions. It can, however, be helpful to support each

participant's expression of their values and beliefs for

acknowledgment by the other party.

10) Conflict between individual

People have differing styles of communication, ambitions, political

or religious views and different cultural backgrounds. In our diverse

society, the possibility of these differences leading to conflict

between individuals is always there, and we must be alert to

preventing and resolving situations where conflict arises.

11) Conflict between groups of people

Whenever people form groups, they tend to emphasise the things

that make their group "better than" or "different from" other groups.

This happens in the fields of sport, culture, religion and the

workplace and can sometimes change from healthy competition to

destructive conflict.

12) Conflict within a group of people

15

Even within one organisation or team, conflict can arise from the

individual differences or ambitions mentioned earlier; or from rivalry

between sub-groups or factions. All leaders and members of the

organisation need to be alert to group dynamics that can spill over

into conflict.

What do organizations use conflict

management for?

For any organisation to be effective and efficient in achieving its

goals, the people in the organisation need to have a shared vision of

what they are striving to achieve, as well as clear objectives for

each team / department and individual. You also need ways of

recognising and resolving conflict amongst people, so that conflict

does not become so serious that co-operation is impossible. All

members of any organisation need to have ways of keeping conflict

to a minimum - and of solving problems caused by conflict, before

conflict becomes a major obstacle to your work. This could happen

to any organisation, whether it is an NGO, a CBO, a political party, a

business or a government.

16

Conflict management is the process of planning to avoid conflict

where possible and organising to resolve conflict where it does

happen, as rapidly and smoothly as possible.

Important things to know about "conflict" and "conflict

management":

The differences between "competition" and "conflict"

"Competition" usually brings out the best in people, as they strive to

be top in their field, whether in sport, community affairs, politics or

work. In fact, fair and friendly competition often leads to new

sporting achievements, scientific inventions or outstanding effort in

solving a community problem. When competition becomes

unfriendly or bitter, though, conflict can begin - and this can bring

out the worst in people.

MODELS OF CONFLICT

Models of conflict help us to understand the processes and factors

involved in conflict episode. Researches on conflict highlight two

models- the process model and the structural model.

PROCESS MODEL

The process model views conflict between two or more parties in

terms of the internal dynamics of conflict episodes. Conflict process

follows five stages occurring sequentially one after other. They are

as follows-

1. FRUSTRATION

17

This emotion arises when one party perceives the other party as

interfering with the satisfaction of his own needs, wants, objectives,

etc. There are three factors precipitating the condition for conflict in

the frustration stage.

They are-

a) Poor communication that arises from semantic difficulties,

misunderstandings and noise in the communication channels.

b) the structure that includes variables like size, degree of

specialization in the task assigned to group members,

member-goal compatibility, leadership styles, reward

systems, etc.

c) Personal variables that include individual value systems and

the personality characteristics that account for individual’s

differences.

2. CONCEPTUALIZATION

This stage focuses on the way each party understands and

perceives the situation. The parties involved define the conflict

situation and the salient alternatives available, which, in turn, affect

the behaviour of the other party.

3. BEHAVIOUR

Here one can observe the actions that result from the perception of

conflict that influences the behaviour of each party. These

influences affect the results in three areas- the orientation in

18

handling conflicts, the strategic objectives which match with

orientation and the tactical behaviour to achieve the objectives set.

4. INTERACTION

The interaction between the two parties either escalates or de

escalates the conflict.

STRUCTURAL MODEL

The structural model identifies the parameters that shape the

conflict episode. There are four such parameters described below-

1. BEHAVIOURAL PREDISPOSITION

This includes one party’s motives, abilities and personality.

2. SOCIAL PRESSURE

The pressure arising from cultural values, organizational work group

norms, interest, etc

3. INCENTIVE STRUCTURE

The objective reality which gives rise to conflict viz., conflict of

interests in competitive issues and common problems.

4. RULES AND PROCEDURE

This parameter includes the decision making machinery, i.e.

decision rules, negotiation, and arbitration procedures, which

constrain and shape the behaviour of those conflicting parties.

19

The above models suggest that conflict can be defined as an

interpersonal dynamic which is shaped by the internal and external

environments of the parties involved and this dynamic is manifested

in a process which affects group performance either functionally or

dysfunctionally.

FUNCTIONAL AND DYSFUNCTIONAL

CONFLICTS

FUNCTIONAL CONFLICT

Functional conflict is understood as the creation or resolution of the

conflict that often leads to constructive problem solving, improving

the quality of decisions, stimulating involvement in the discussion

and building group cohesion. This will result in clarification of

important problems and defining and sharpening of the issues as

well. Of course, introduction of conflict motivates individual to

perform better and work harder. It satisfies certain psychological

needs like dominance, aggression, esteem and ego, thereby,

providing an opportunity for constructive use and release of

aggressive urges. In some cases, it facilitates an understanding of

the problem, people and inters relationship that exists within them.

Within a group, conflict may define, maintain and strengthen group

boundaries, contributing to the group’s distinctiveness and

increasing group solidarity and cohesion. Many a time, it leads to

alliances with other groups, creating bonds between loosely

structured groups or bringing together different individuals and

groups in a community to fight a common threat.

DYSFUNCTIONAL CONFLICT

20

Dysfunctional conflict can be understood as an undesirable

experience that is avoided. It has serious negative effects. It creates

difficulties in communication between individuals, breaks personal

and professional relationships and reduces effectiveness by causing

tension, anxiety and stress.

Intense conflict over a prolonged period affects individuals

emotionally and physically and this gives rise to psychosomatic

disorders and in some cases and a total breakdown of rules,

undermining morale or self concept of human existence. The various

responses to conflict are shown as below-

In an organizational set up, it is observed that conflict may lead to

work sabotage, lower employee morale and decline in the market

share of product/ services and consequent loss of productivity.

Besides, lack of trust and withholding of information lead to

communication gap and reduction of job performance in case the

parties in conflict are interdependent in completing their jobs.

Conflict based on competition among the co workers becomes

harmful when the goal of the organization is higher product quality.

Deep and lasting conflicts that are not addressed may even trigger

violence among employees or between employees and others.

CONFLICT AND PERFORMANCE

As conflict intensity increases, so does the level of performance.

This, however, has a limit. After a certain point, increment in conflict

intensity badly affects performance. The graph can be divided into

three zones on the basis of level of conflict- Zone 1 (low level of

conflict), Zone 2 (optimum level of conflict), and Zone 3 (high level

21

of conflict). They are characterized as low motivational, effective,

and psychosomatic zones.

1. LOW LEVEL OF CONFLICT (ZONE 1):

When the conflict level is low, the behaviour of the employees is

observed to be apathetic, stagnant and non-responsive. An

extremely low level of conflict can result in complacency and poor

performance due to lack of innovation. It may be due to low

motivation. If the group is in the low motivational zone then there is

the necessity of stimulating conflict in order to help the individual/

group move towards the effective zone.

2. OPTIMAL LEVEL OF CONFLICT (ZONE 2):

The behaviour of the employee is observed to be viable, self critical

and innovative. It is the effective zone leading to high productivity

outcome. Proper care should be taken to ensure that the level of

intensity does not cross the upper limit of the effective zone.

The upper limit of the effective zone varies from person to person. It

depends on the tolerance level of an individual and it is determined

by job compatibility, job experience, attitudinal framework,

personality framework, risk taking, optimism, etc.

3. HIGH LEVEL OF CONFLICT (ZONE 3):

It is expressed in terms of disruptive, chaotic and uncooperative

behaviour. It can be described as the psychosomatic zone. The

performance of the employee in this zone is badly affected and once

an employee reaches this stage, it is extremely difficult to retrieve

him back to the effective zone.

22

A manager needs a degree of creativity to determine strategies and

tactics for reducing or, if necessary, increasing the level of conflict.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONFLICT AND

PERFORMANCE IN TEAM

A series of experiments have been conducted to examine the

relationship between the levels of different levels of conflict and

team performance, both in terms of the task and individual

attitudes. It was observed that the types of conflict determine the

nature of relationship with performance. Types of conflict can be

affective conflict, task conflict, process conflict.

1. Relationship between affective conflict and performance:

Affective conflict focuses on interpersonal differences. It is a

perception of incompatibility that other members are preventing the

accomplishment of a goal. It is manifested by tension, argument and

withdrawal. The effects of this conflict include behaviours like

distraction in the members’ attention, reduction in their ability to

think clearly and encouragement of perceptions of hostile intentions

in other’s actions. It generally has a negative effect on team

performance, as the team members spend their time and energy

focusing on each other rather than on the task and therefore the

information processing ability is limited.

2. Relationship between process conflict and performance:

Process conflict exists when team members disagree about the

procedures to be followed in accomplishing the team goal. As the

intensity of conflict increases, the performance of the team is

adversely affected.

23

3. Relationship between task conflict and performance:

Task conflict has generally been found to have a positive effect on

task performance, provided that the level of conflict is appropriate

to the complexity and uncertainty of the team’s work. Task conflict

may cause unease among individuals and weaken their

commitment towards the team. Team members have an opportunity

to express their own voice, opinions and perspectives.

Extremely high conflict may lead to member dissatisfaction and low

commitment to the team. Researches have shown that task conflict

was effective where decisions were made quickly but not when the

decisions were decided slowly.

INTRA-PERSONAL CONFLICT

A common form of intra-personal conflict in everyday life involves

choices between mutually exclusive goals or incompatible goals.

Women entrepreneurs may face the dilemma of being successful in

business as well as taking care of their families. While looking for

the success of their own business venture and balancing their family

lives, they often face this kind of conflict. An individual may

experience internal conflict due to the presence of:

A number of competing needs and roles.

24

A variety of different drives that compel the individual to act

in a certain way.

Barriers that may come in between the drive and the goal

achievement.

Both positive and negative aspects attached to desired goals.

Not having a clear understanding of what is expected from the

job role.

ASPECTS OF INTRA-PERSONAL CONFLICT

1. Conflict due to frustration:

Frustration occurs when a motivated drive is blocked before a

person reaches a desired goal. The barrier can be overt (physical) or

covert (mental-social-psychological). For example, consider an

intelligent but poor student who got selected in one of the top

universities in the US to pursue his Ph.D. degree. He can pursue his

studies if he gets scholarship. Financial help, if not received in time,

can be major hindrance in achieving his goal.

If he cannot get the scholarship, then it becomes a powerful barrier

towards attaining the goal. This creates a conflict within the

individual leading to frustration. His inner conflict can be expressed

in different types of behaviour such as aggression, withdrawal,

displacement, compromise and regression. The reactions or the

behavioural patterns of the employees when faced with a barrier are

described in the figure below:

2. Conflict due to goal:

Conflict occurs when an individual has to select one option from

among many alternatives. It can be selecting a job offer against

continuing research. Selection of one option eliminates other

25

alternatives. Intra-individual goal conflict can be identified

depending on the nature of the choices. It can be approach-

approach, avoidance-avoidance, or approach-avoidance.

A. approach-approach conflict:

It arises when an individual has to choose between two attractive

alternatives. It is a conflict between two positive goals. For example,

an employer faces an approach-approach conflict when he/she must

choose between two highly qualified applicants for a single position.

Similarly, a job seeker must cope with an approach-approach

conflict while deciding which of two outstanding but equally

appealing jobs offers to accept. In social context, a conflict may

arise when a person wants to go to a friend’s house as well as to

watch movie, both scheduled for the same evening.

Diagrammatically, it can be represented as:

G1------------------------------INDIVIDUAL--------------------------G2

(+VALENCE) (+ VALENCE)

Here, G1 and G2 stand for Goal 1 and Goal 2 respectively. Here two

attractive goals are before the individual and both have positive

valence for him. The person is initially caught between the two

alternatives. It is because the strength of each motive to approach a

desired goal is strong. This causes conflict within the individual as to

which one to go for i.e. G1 or G2.

B. avoidance-avoidance conflict:

It involves a choice between two equally unattractive options. This is

the case where two goals have negative valence and the person has

to decide on one of them. Consider these three cases- a person has

a physical illness that is very uncomfortable, such as ulcers, but he

is scared of getting operated, a woman has to decide between the

26

task she intensely dislikes or she loses her job, a student who is

vegetarian has to eat either chicken or fish during ragging period.

The result in all the three cases is that the person is caught between

two unattractive options.

G1------------------------INDIVIDUAL---------------------------G2

(-VE VALENCE) (-VE

VALENCE)

G1 and G2 stand for Goal 1 and Goal 2 respectively. Two

kinds of behaviour are likely to be conspicuous in avoidance-

avoidance conflicts. As one of the negative goals is approached, the

person finds it increasingly repellent and consequently retreats or

withdraws from it. After withdrawing from this goal, this person

comes closer to the other negative goal but finds out that this too is

unbearably repelling.

C. approach-avoidance conflict:

In certain situations, the individual faces conflict when he has to

decide whether to approach or avoid a particular goal that has both

positive as well as negative qualities.

INDIVIDUAL----------------- G ------------------- (+ve & -ve

VALENCE)

This is not an uncommon situation in organizational settings where

many goals have mixed outcomes for an individual. A student may

face it while choosing a course that gives job assurance after the

course completion but involves uninteresting syllabus, or when an

employee is offered a promotion.

27

SOURCES OF INTRA-PESONAL CONFLICT

The sources of intra-personal conflict discussed

here are cognitive dissonance and neurotic tendencies within the

individual.

1. COGNITIVE DISSONANCE:

Cognitive dissonance is an unpleasant state that occurs when an

individual discovers inconsistencies between two of their attitudes

or their behaviour. For example, “I am against prejudice” but “I

don’t want people of other religion living in my neighbourhood.”

Sometimes, our attitudes and behaviour are inconsistent, “I am on

diet” but “I am having an ice-cream”

To resolve the inconsistencies and discomfort, individual either has

to-

Change his thoughts or behaviours.

Obtain more information about the issue.

2. NEUROTIC TENDENCIES:

Neurotic tendencies are irrational personality mechanisms that an

individual uses, often unconsciously, that create inner conflict. In

turn, inner conflict often results in behaviours that lead to conflict

with other people. Managers having neurotic personality use

excessively tight organizational controls like budgets, rules and

regulations, monitoring systems etc. because they distrust people.

They are often fearful of uncertainty and risk, not just distrustful of

others. They rely on hunches and impressions rather than available

28

facts and advices. Such managers usually don’t use participation

and consultation in their decision-making unless asked to do so by

some higher authority.

Individuals with strong neurotic tendencies struggle unsuccessfully

with intra-personal conflict. They are unable to resolve their

conflicts. Their excessive distrust and urge to control triggers and

conflict with others, especially with subordinates who feel

micromanaged and distrusted. Subordinates, in turn, often try to

even secure and protect themselves from further abuse. These

reactions of the subordinates give the manager a stronger sense of

employee worthlessness. It convinces him to intensify his attempt to

control and punish subordinates.

INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

It can be between co-workers, team members or room mates. The

nature of interpersonal conflict in organizations can be of two types:

substantive (content based) and emotional (emotion based) conflict.

Substantive conflicts arise due to work-related matters. For

example, differences in viewpoints and opinions pertaining to a

group task. Emotional conflicts tend to evolve when people do not

constructively deal with their frustration, anger, fear, distress or

resentment. It is otherwise called relationship conflict or affective

conflict.

Managers should be able to identify whether a conflict between two

individuals has been helpful or harmful. It is beneficial if the

aftermath of the conflict reveals that-

(a) Both individuals are able to work better together.

(b) They feel better about each other and their own jobs.

29

(c) Both express satisfaction about the way the conflict was

resolved.

(d) They consider their abilities to handle future conflicts

improved.

STAGES OF INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

There are three stages of interpersonal conflict. The manager’s goal

is to identify and manage conflict before it escalates to physical

aggression. Developing conflict stage – In initial stage of conflict

there are three levels. They are latent conflict, conflict awareness

and frustration in employees. Latent conflict is indicated by

characteristic behaviour changes such as isolation, self centred

behaviour, avoidance and denial. Conflict awareness stage can be

recognised by behaviour like complaints, gestures, stress and

difference of opinions. Tonality, physical signs, negativism,

withdrawal and over SENSITIVITY ARE THE symptoms of frustration

stage.

RECOGNISABLE CONFLICT STAGE

The recognisable behaviour that are generally observed are tension,

friction and frequent disagreement. Tension can be recognised by

distrust, anxiety, silence, poor communication and unpredictable

behaviour. Friction is one of the clear expression of inter personal

conflict that can be recognised by uncooperative, nervous, anger ,

no communication and passive behaviour. Frequent disagreement is

expressed in behaviours like being negative, arguments and

blaming and resorting to use of power.

AGGRESSIVE CONFLICT STAGE

30

A manager would not like the conflict in his team to reach this

stage. Once it reaches this stage, it is almost difficult to handle the

conflict. Highest priority has to be applied to resolve the matter, but

could prove tuff. This stage is expressed in three sub stages like

verbal abuse, sarcasm, physical assault and threat. Verbal abuse is

identified in behaviours such as name calling, taunting, interrupting

and shouting. Physical threats can be observable in behaviours as

interfering into others space, physical posturing, clenching fist etc.

physical assault is expressed in behaviours like physical contact,

intense feelings, intention to harm and aggression.

BEHAVIOURIAL CONFLICT INDICATORS

Body language

Surprises

Withholding bad news

Open disagreement

Fighting for certain specific goals

Strong public statements

Increasing lack of respect

No discussion of progress

SOURCES OF INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

RELATIONSHIP RULES

Our relationships are governed by a set of informal rules, the

behaviour most people thinks is appropriate or inappropriate in a

31

particular context. Four different types of relations rules have being

identified.

Rules of support: this includes offering practical help on a work

related task, standing in for colleagues in their absence, giving

advice, encouraging or guiding subordinates or clients so on.

Rules of intimacy: this can be understood as respecting the other

person’s privacy and refraining from engaging in sexual activity with

subordinates or within professional relationship.

Rules of relating to third parties: others not involved in our day

to day interactions can have a major effect on our immediate

relationships. One should not criticise others in public, nor should

one discuss with others what has being told to him or her in

confidence.

Task related Rules: all professional relationships, whether teacher

-student or doctor-patient, are largely governed by rules which

relate to the completion of specific task. For example a teacher is

expected to prepare the lessons, plan and assigned work; a doctor

is expected to advice and treats the patient. In general, an

understanding of the rules is shared by both the parties or is

clarified by the professional concerned. The working relationships

between employees are affected when relationship rules are broken.

Sometimes misperception, misunderstanding or disagreements

about the way the work should be conducted becomes potential

source of conflict.

PERSONALITY, GENDER AND AGE RELATED ISSUES-

Personality Clash Interpersonal conflict may occur when two or

more persons come from different backgrounds, share different

experiences (upbringing, family traditions and socialisation process)

32

and hence may interpret the same facts differently. It may also be

due to difference in cultures or because of different values and

beliefs they hold. For example, someone who is very rigid in his way

of working would find It difficult to work with someone who is very

flexible, someone who is conscientious would find it difficult to work

with a person who is rather laid back in his approach.

GROUP/ TEAM CONFLICT

Group conflicts, also called group intrigues, is where social

behavior causes groups of individuals to conflict with each other. It

can also refer to a conflict within these groups. This conflict is often

caused by differences in social norms, values, and religion. Both

constructive and destructive conflict occurs in most small groups. It

is very important to accentuate the constructive conflict and

minimize the destructive conflict. Conflict is bound to happen, but if

we use it constructively then it need not be a bad thing.

When destructive conflict is used in small groups, it is

counterproductive to the long term goal. It is much like poisoning

the goose that lays the golden eggs. In the case of small group

communication, destructive conflict creates hostility between the

members. This poisons group synergy and the results, the golden

eggs if you will, either cease being produced or are at least inferior

in quality.

Using constructive conflict within small groups has the opposite

effect. It is much like nourishing the goose so that it continues to

produce the golden eggs, golden eggs which may be even better

than what the unnourished goose could have produced. In this

sense, bringing up problems and alternative solutions while still

valuing others in small groups allows the group to work forward.

33

Conflicts between people in work groups, committees, task forces,

and other organizational forms of face-to-face groups are inevitable.

As we have mentioned, these conflicts may be destructive as well as

constructive.

Conflict arises in groups because of the scarcity of freedom,

position, and resources. People who value independence tend to

resist the need for interdependence and, to some extent, conformity

within a group. People who seek power therefore struggle with

others for position or status within the group. Rewards and

recognition are often perceived as insufficient and improperly

distributed, and members are inclined to compete with each other

for these prizes.

In western culture, winning is more acceptable than losing, and

competition is more prevalent than cooperation, all of which tends

to intensify intra-group conflict. Group meetings are often

conducted in a win-lose climate — that is, individual or subgroup

interaction is conducted for the purpose of determining a winner

and a loser rather than for achieving mutual problem solving.

SOURCE OF GROUP CONFLICT

Conflicts happen in groups for many reasons. Dee Kelsey and Pam

Plumb identify these sources of conflict:

Miscommunication and misinformation

Real or perceived differences in needs and priorities

Real or perceived differences in values, perceptions, beliefs,

attitudes and culture

Structural conditions

Each of these sources of conflict can be approached with specific

strategies. In general, conflicts arising from miscommunication and

34

misinformation are easier to resolve than those arising from

differences in needs and priorities.

ETHNIC GROUP CONFLICT

Ethnic group conflicts are very real concerns that many

governments try to always deal with through peaceful means. The

loyalty to your ethnic heritage can be quite powerful to the point

that it can drive some people to doing things that may seem

pointless and senseless. At the core of every conflict is a

fundamental misunderstanding on how things are to be done in

society.

For so long, the British territory of Northern Ireland has had to

contend with the warring factions of the Catholics and Protestants in

the area. Protestants have always been used to having better jobs

and a better state in life while the Catholics were usually relegated

to menial jobs. This has made the relationship of the two ethnic

groups very contentious but through the efforts of many groups

from inside and outside Great Britain, the armed uprising has been

stemmed in recent years.

While the conditions still remain tense and there is still gross

inequality in the amount of opportunities that are available for

different people in society, this episode in history proves that

despite the statistical data that one might have, it's still possible to

resolve misunderstandings through a good conversation and a well

moderated dialogue between involved parties.

Africa has gotten the brunt of recent ethnic group violence. The

country of Sudan has been in the spotlight in recent years due to

the ongoing genocide that has been responsible for displacing

millions of Darfurians as well as the death of an untold number.

35

The conflict has been due to the inherent differences between the

more Arabic Sudanese from the north of the country to the more

Sub-Saharan African cultures to the south of the Khartoum - the

Sudanese capital. There are also other parts of Africa that are in

current unrest. The so-called "blood diamonds" - already a topic of

critically-acclaimed films, such as the one starring Leonardo di

Caprio - are the gems that have fueled the wars in the country of

Liberia. While the rest of the world gets something that could be

used for a nice piece of jewelry, many people in Liberia literally toil

with blood, sweat and tears for these embellishments to our jewelry

pieces.

What makes Africa ground zero for ethnic conflict is the fact that the

Europeans arbitrarily divided the continent without really paying

attention to the various tribes that existed within the artificial

subdivisions that they've made. Now that most of the countries are

already starting to break away from the clutches of the colonizers,

they are left in a daze with a highly fragmented nation. It's almost

like they have nothing much in common.

Even their appreciations for silver jewelry or their cooking technique

are not alike - and believe it or not, these mundane things can even

lead to entire villages being razed. The Rwandan genocide of the

last decade went on largely ignored by the international community

and its basis was purely ethnic. Ethnic conflicts are a fact of life and

they've been going on and on for thousands of years. The challenge

for the new generation is to rise over the differences and make the

world a more peaceful place.

36

NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF GROUP CONFLICTS

The win-lose conflict in groups may have some of the following

negative effects

Divert time and energy from the main issues

Delay decisions

Create deadlocks

Drive unaggressive committee members to the sidelines

Interfere with listening

Obstruct exploration of more alternatives

Decrease or destroy sensitivity

Cause members to drop out or resign from committees

Arouse anger that disrupts a meeting

Interfere with empathy

Leave losers resentful

Incline underdogs to sabotage

Provoke personal abuse

Cause defensiveness

Results of group conflicts

Conflict in the group need not lead to negative results, however. The

presence of a dissenting member or subgroup often results in more

penetration of the group's problem and more creative solutions. This

is because disagreement forces the members to think harder in an

attempt to cope with what may be valid objections to general group

opinion. But the group must know how to deal with differences that

may arise.

37

INTERGROUP CONFLICT

Conflict between groups is a sometimes necessary, sometimes

destructive, event that occurs at all levels and across all functions in

organizations. Intergroup conflict may help generate creative

tensions leading to more effective contributions to the

organization's goals, such as competition between sales districts for

the highest sales. [3] Intergroup conflict is destructive when it

alienates groups that should be working together, when it results in

win-lose competition, and when it leads to compromises that

represent less-than-optimum outcomes.

Intergroup conflict occurs in two general forms. Horizontal strain

involves competition between functions: for example, sales versus

production, research and development versus engineering,

purchasing versus legal, line versus staff, and so on. Vertical

strain involves competition between hierarchical levels: for

example, union versus management, foremen versus middle

management, shop workers versus foremen.

A struggle between a group of employees and management is an

example of vertical strain or conflict. A clash between a sales

department and production over inventory policy would be an

example of horizontal strain. Certain activities and attitudes are

typical in groups involved in a win-lose conflict. Each side closes

ranks and prepares itself for battle. Members show increased loyalty

and support for their own groups.

Minor differences between group members tend to be smoothed

over, and deviants are dealt with harshly. The level of morale in the

groups increases and infuses everyone with competitive spirit. The

power structure becomes better defined, as the "real" leaders come

to the surface and members rally around the "best" thinkers and

38

talkers. In addition, each group tends to distort both its own views

and those of the competing group.

What is perceived as "good" in one's own position is emphasized,

what is "bad" is ignored; the position of the other group is assessed

as uniformly "bad," with little "good" to be acknowledged or

accepted. Thus, the judgment and objectivity of both groups are

impaired. When such groups meet to "discuss" their differences,

constructive, rational behavior is severely inhibited.

Each side phrases its questions and answers in a way that

strengthens its own position and disparages the other's. Hostility

between the two groups increases; mutual understandings are

buried in negative stereotypes. It is easy to see that under the

conditions described above, mutual solutions to problems cannot be

achieved. As a result, the side having the greater power wins; the

other side loses. Or the conflict may go unresolved, and undesirable

conditions or circumstances continue.

Or the conflict may be settled by a higher authority. None of these

outcomes is a happy one. Disputes settled on the basis of power,

such as through a strike or a lockout in a labor-management

dispute, are often deeply resented by the loser. Such settlements

may be resisted and the winner defeated in underground ways that

are difficult to detect and to counter. When this happens, neither

side wins; both are losers.

Strategies for Managing Group Conflicts

Avoidance - a management strategy which includes no attention or

creating a total separation of the combatants or a partial separation

that allows limited interaction

39

Smoothing - technique which stresses the achievement of

harmony between disputants

Dominance or Power Intervention - the imposition of a solution

by higher management, other than the level at which the conflict

exists

Compromise - strategy that seeks a resolution which satisfies at

least part of the each party's position

Confrontation - strategy featuring a thorough and frank discussion

of the sources and types of conflict and achieving a resolution that

is in the best interest of the group, but that may be at the expense

of one or all of the conflicting parties

A trained conflict resolver can begin with an economical

intervention, such as getting group members to clarify and reaffirm

shared goals. If necessary, he or she moves through a systematic

series of interventions, such as testing the members' ability and

willingness to compromise; resorting to confrontation, enforced

counseling, and/or termination as last resorts.

STYLES OF DEALING WITH INTERGROUP

CONFLICT

Those who study people and conflict have developed theories about

how we, as individuals and as members of groups, respond to

conflict. In general, we tend to get comfortable with one set of

responses, even though we can learn skills allowing us to respond to

each situation differently. Five common responses are listed below.

Do you recognize yourself in this list?

I avoid conflict.

40

I accommodate others to keep the peace.

I compromise; find middle ground.

I compete; try to win with my own solution.

I collaborate; seek a better solution.

In truth, all of these conflict response styles work in some situations

and not so well in others. The choice for the individual and for the

group is what style best matches the situation and the desired

outcome.

Personal and group skills for dealing with conflict

The basic skills for dealing with conflict have to do with describing

the conflict in such a way that people don’t feel personally attacked.

You can do this by asking questions to determine the sources of the

conflict and offering a description, testing it to see if others also see

things as you do. By continuing to question and test, the group will

come to understand what the conflict is about.

In order to do this work, the bedrock skill is listening—listening for

facts as well as feelings. You convey that you are listening through

the language of your body (by making eye contact, by smiling, by

leaning forward, by nodding) and by restating and summarizing

what someone have said. This kind of acknowledgement of another

person is often a powerful way to defuse situations that have

become tense or disruptive.

You also convey that you are listening fully by asking questions that

allow speakers to open up, allowing them to focus on what they are

feeling, thinking and wanting to happen. If you have listened well,

and have found agreement with your framing of the conflict, you

may be able to suggest a group process for finding a solution.

41

ROLES AND SKILLS FOR FACILITATORS

A facilitator in group conflict situations creates safe space for all

participants to feel fully heard, respected and supported. Safe space

can become creative space for finding solutions. Facilitators can

help the group establish ground rules and procedures that lead to

conflict resolution. Facilitators do not have a vested interest in a

particular solution; they do not take sides in a conflict. Facilitators

act in service to the group, helping the group be more effective,

accomplish its work and maintain relationships. 

In addition to the skills of listening and questioning already noted, a

facilitator needs to develop skills to call the group’s attention to how

it is doing its work or how individual members are behaving, either

to move the group forward or to hold it back. These skills are like

holding up a mirror so that the group can observe itself and make

changes. 

Several experts have described the process of holding up the mirror

to the group, or intervening:

Notice what is going on, both behaviour and its impact on

the group.

Decide whether what is going on needs to be mirrored to

the group.

If you decide it does, describe what you have noticed in a

non-blaming way.

Test the impact you sense the behaviour is having on the

group.

Ask if the group wants to do anything differently, or

suggest new behaviour.

Remind the group members that they can also hold the

mirror. 

42

This publication won’t make you an expert at dealing with and

resolving conflict in groups. However, it has provided some ideas

about where conflict comes from, ways that we tend to deal with

conflict, and a process for a group to use in conflict situations. If you

are interested in learning more and improving your skills as a

facilitator, check out the other publications in this series.

ORGANISATIONAL CONFLICT

Organizational conflict is a state of discord caused by the actual

or perceived opposition of needs, values and interests between

people working together. Conflict takes many forms in

organizations. There is the inevitable clash between formal authority

and power and those individuals and groups affected. There are

disputes over how revenues should be divided, how the work should

be done and how long and hard people should work.

There are jurisdictional disagreements among individuals,

departments, and between unions and management. There are

subtler forms of conflict involving rivalries, jealousies, personality

clashes, role definitions, and struggles for power and favor. There is

also conflict within individuals — between competing needs and

demands — to which individuals respond in different ways.

Top Ten reasons of organizational conflicts

1. Divisions and departments often have different objectives. If

their members cannot find common values and goals, they

will not cooperate.

2. Employees are more knowledgeable and comfortable being

solo contributors than being thorough members of a team,

despite the need for interdependency in most work. This is

43

exaggerated when, through their reward systems,

organizations encourage employees to compete with one

another. Teamwork is a concept that must be learned and

applied throughout the organization.

3. Employees are neither trained nor prepared to negotiate

shared areas of responsibility and productivity gaps

comfortably.

4. Supervisors may state their expectations of employee job

performance, but they usually do not know how to do so in a

way that can be heard and understood effectively.

5. Organizational problems and responsibilities are analyzed

from individual or departmental viewpoints, rather than from

that of the organization as a whole. Good decisions are further

undermined by a short-term, crisis approach to problem-

solving.

6. Managers would rather do the work themselves than take

responsibility for motivating others to do their best work. To

motivate each employee to contribute maximum productivity,

managers must demonstrate insight, dedication and flexibility.

7. Executives need significant information from front-line

employees to make good decisions. Yet they seldom know

how to ask for meaningful information, input or feedback from

employees.

8. Differences in personality, approach to tasks and individual

values create even more friction and tension than that caused

by racial or cultural background differences.

9. Good communication requires trust, a suspension of

assumptions and hard work, which most organizations do

not demonstrate well from executive level downward to front

line employees.   

44

10. Small and large changes occur constantly within

organizations, but the emotions these changes generate are

seldom addressed.

The effective management of workplace conflict requires an

understanding of the nature and sources of conflict in the

workplace. Conflict occurs when there is a perception of

incompatible interests between workplace participants. This should

be distinguished from disputes. Disputes are merely a by-product of

conflict. They are the outward articulation of conflict. Typical

disputes come in the form of formal court cases, grievances,

arguments, threats and counter threats etc. Conflict can exist

without disputes, but disputes do not exist without conflict. Conflict,

however, might not be so easily noticed. Much conflict exists in

every workplace without turning into disputes.

The first step in uncovering workplace conflict is to consider the

typical sources of conflict. There are a variety of sources of

workplace conflict including interpersonal, organizational, change

related, and external factors.

Interpersonal

Interpersonal conflict is the most apparent form of conflict for

workplace participants. It is easy enough to observe the results of

office politics, gossip, and rumours. Also language and personality

styles often clash, creating a great deal of conflict in the workplace.

In many workplaces there are strong ethno-cultural and racial

sources of conflict as well as gender conflict.

This may lead to charges of harassment and discrimination or at

least the feeling that such things exist. People often bring their

stresses from home into the office leading to further conflict. An

45

additional source of workplace conflict can be found in varying ideas

about personal success.

Organizational

There are a number of organizational sources of conflict. Those

relating to hierarchy and the inability to resolve conflicting interests

are quite predominant in most workplaces. Labour/management and

supervisor/employee tensions are heightened by power differences.

Differences in supervisory styles between departments can be a

cause of conflict. Also there can be work style clashes,

seniority/juniority and pay equity conflict.

Conflict can arise over resource allocation, the distribution of duties,

workload and benefits, different levels of tolerance for risk taking,

and varying views on accountability. In addition, conflict can arise

where there are perceived or actual differences in treatment

between departments or groups of employees. A thorough review of

the workplace is suggested for such sources of conflict.

Again surveys, interviews and focus groups can help reveal these

sources of conflict. Additionally, organizational sources of conflict

can be predicted based upon best practices from similar

organizations. All organizations experience such conflict. Much can

be learned from the lessons of similar organizations that have made

a study of this source of conflict.

Trends/Change

The modern workplace has significant levels of stress and conflict

related to change-management and downsizing. Technological

change can cause conflict, as can change work methodologies.

Many workplaces suffer from constant reorganization, leading to

further stress and conflict.

46

In line with reorganization, many public and non-profit organizations

suffer from downloading of responsibilities from other organizations.

Workplace analysts should review the history of the particular

organization, reaching back as far as 10 years to determine the

level of churn that has taken place. Generally speaking, the more

change and the more recent the change, the more likely there will

be significant conflict.

External Factors

External factors can also lead to conflict in the workplace. Economic

pressures are caused by recession, changing markets, domestic and

foreign competition, and the effects of Free Trade between

countries. Conflict arises with clients and suppliers effecting

customer service and delivery of goods. Also public and non-profit

workplaces in particular can face political pressures and demands

from special interest groups.

A change in government can have a tremendous impact, especially

on public and non-profit organizations. Funding levels for workplaces

dependent upon government funding can change dramatically.

Public ideologies can have an impact on the way employees are

treated and viewed in such organizations. To look for external

factors of conflict, have a review of the relationships between the

subject organization and other organizations.

Companies or government departments that have constant

relationships with outside organizations will find this to be a major

source of conflict for workplace participants.

47

THE THOMAS CONFLICT RESOLUTION

APPROACH

Conflict can occur in any situation where one person’s concerns are

different from another person’s. As a result, conflict includes both

heated arguments and simple differences of opinion. Conflict is not

necessarily a bad thing in the workplace; in fact, conflict can often

lead to increased effectiveness. Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann

have defined five different modes of dealing with conflict and

identified the situations in which each mode is most effective.

Most people have one or two conflict modes that come naturally to

them and are easy to use. For certain types of conflicts, their natural

approach may not be the most appropriate. The five conflict

handling modes are listed below along with the types of conflict for

which they are most effective.

48

1. COMPETING “My way or the highway” The competing mode is

characterized by high assertiveness and low cooperativeness, where

the goal is to win. Some appropriate uses for the competing mode

are taking quick action, making unpopular decisions, and discussing

issues of critical importance when you know for certain that your

position is correct.

2. COLLABORATING “Two heads are better than one” The

collaborating mode is characterized by high assertiveness and high

cooperativeness, where the goal is to work with other people to find

a win-win solution. Some appropriate uses for the collaborating

mode are integrating solutions, learning, merging perspectives,

gaining commitment, and improving relationships.

49

3. COMPROMISING “Let’s make a deal” The compromising mode is

characterized by moderate assertiveness and moderate

cooperativeness, and involves negotiating or splitting the difference

in opinion. The goal is to find the middle ground. Some appropriate

uses for the compromising mode include issues of moderate

importance, developing temporary solutions, or when you are under

time constraints.

4. AVOIDING “I’ll think about it tomorrow” The avoiding mode is

characterized by low assertiveness and low cooperativeness, and

means that neither parties concern is satisfied. The goal is to delay.

Appropriate uses of the avoiding mode include dealing with issues of

little importance, reducing tensions, and buying time.

5. ACCOMMODATING “It would be my pleasure” The

accommodating mode is characterized by low assertiveness and

high cooperativeness, and can be acts of selfless generosity or

obeying orders. The goal is to yield. The accommodating mode is

useful for showing reasonableness, developing performance,

creating good will, and dealing with issues of low importance.

As mentioned earlier, each of these five modes of handling conflict

have strengths and weaknesses, making them more or less

appropriate depending on the situation. One of the most important

steps in being able to recognize and apply the most effective

conflict mode is to be aware of what comes most naturally for

yourself. The Thomas- Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument can help

people come to that understanding.

ORGANISATIONAL THEORY

Maturity-immaturity theory

According to Maslow, Argyris, McGregor, Rogers, and other writers

of the so-called growth schools, there is a basic tendency in the

50

development of the human personality toward self-fulfillment, or

self-actualization. This implies that as an individual matures, he

wants to be given more responsibility, broader horizons, and the

opportunity to develop his personal potential. This process is

interrupted whenever a person's environment fails to encourage and

nurture these desires.

Formal organizations are rational structures that, based on their

assumption of emotions, feelings, and irrationality as human

weaknesses, try to replace individual control with institutional

control. Thus the principle of task specialization is seen as a device

that simplifies tasks for the sake of efficiency. As a consequence,

however, it uses only a fraction of a person's capacity and ability.

The principle of chain of command centralizes authority but makes

the individual more dependent on his superiors.

The principle of normal span of control, which assigns a maximum of

six or seven subordinates to report to the chief executive, reduces

the number of individuals reporting to the head of the organization

or to the manager of any subunit. Although this simplifies the job of

control for the manager, it also creates more intensive surveillance

of the subordinate, and therefore permits him less freedom to

control himself.

Under such conditions, subordinates are bound to find themselves in

conflict with the formal organization, and sometimes with each

other. They advance up the narrowing hierarchy where jobs get

fewer, and "fewer" implies competing with others for the decreasing

number of openings. Task specialization tends to focus the

subordinate's attention on his own narrow function and divert him

from thinking about the organization as a whole.

This effect increases the need for coordination and leads to a

circular process of increasing the dependence on the leader. They

51

may respond to organizational pressures and threats by defensive

reactions such as aggression against their supervisors and co-

workers, fixated behavior or apathy, compromise and

gamesmanship, or psychological withdrawal and daydreaming. All of

these defense mechanisms reduce a person's potential for creative,

constructive activity on the job.

Finally, employees may organize unions or unsanctioned informal

groups whose norms of behavior are opposed to many of the

organization's goals. As a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, all of these

reactions to the constraints of the formal organization merely serve

to reinforce and strengthen them. The conflict between the formal

organization and the individual will continue to exist wherever

managers remain ignorant of its causes or wherever the

organizational structure and the leadership style are allowed to

become inconsistent with the legitimate needs of the

psychologically healthy individual.

Everyone recognizes the necessity for order and control in

organizations. Those of us who enter management, however, must

learn to recognize in addition that order and control can be achieved

only at the expense of individual freedom.

Theories on Conflict Management

There are perhaps as many theories for managing conflict as

there are types of conflict.  Ranging from formal models to more

simple problem-solving techniques, these theories offer many

creative approaches to resolving conflict in various settings. 

Possibly the most important part of the conflict resolution process

is using the most appropriate resolution for the conflict at hand. 

To be sure, using the wrong antidote to attempt to cure an

ailment is a waste of time and resources.  The following overview

52

of some conflict management theories may aid in selection of the

most effective management tool(s).

The Circle of Conflict

Author Gary T. Furlong provides one of the most comprehensive

sources for conflict resolution models in his book The Conflict

Resolution Toolbox: Models & Maps for Analyzing, Diagnosing,

and Resolving Conflict.  The Circle of Conflict is a model offered

by Furlong and focuses on the various causes, or drivers, of

conflict.  According to this model, the six most common drivers of

conflict are:

Values—one’s belief systems, ideas of right versus wrong,

etc.

Relationships—stereotypes, poor or failed communications,

repetitive negative behaviours, etc.

Externals/Moods—factors unrelated to the conflict,

psychological or physiological issues of parties in conflict

Data—lack of information, misinformation, too much

information, data collection problems

Interests—each party’s wants, needs, desires, fears, or

concerns

Structure—limitations on resources like time and money,

geographical constraints, organizational structure, authority

issues

Furlong’s Circle of Conflict resembles a pie graph divided into six

equal parts in which values, relationships, and externals/moods

drivers appear in the top half and data, interests, and structure

drivers appear in the bottom half of the graph (see figure below). 

The main premise of this model is that conflict can be more easily

resolved if discussions are focused on drivers in the bottom half

of the circle (data, interests, and structure).  According to

53

Furlong, concentrating on these drivers—things over which

parties have some control—offers a more direct path toward

managing the dispute. 

Furlong contends that when conflicting parties allow their

discussion to stray into drivers in the top half of the circle (values,

relationships, and externals/moods), conflict will likely escalate. 

Because these drivers represent areas that are not generally

within a party’s control, it is best to avoid them.  Changing

another’s perceptions of perceived past wrongs or dealing with

external issues would make any disagreement worsen. 

Conversely, individuals in conflict can work together to change

data problems, allay another’s fears, and overcome geographical

constraints.  These drivers are in the bottom portion of the circle

of conflict, where, according to Furlong, most of the real

resolution work should focus.

54

The Conflict Resolution Model

In his book, Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Patrick

Lencioni presents another conflict resolution model.  Lencioni’s

model is a series of concentric circles cantered on a point of

conflict (see figure below). 

55

 

This model proposes four different types of obstacles that prevent

issues from being resolved.  According to Lencioni, the obstacles

closest to the centre of the model—i.e., the issue—are the easiest

barriers to overcome, with obstacles becoming increasingly more

difficult to overcome as one moves outward from the centre of

the model.  These barriers include:

56

Informational obstacles (circle closest to the issue or

conflict)—the easiest issues for most people to discuss;

individuals must exchange information, facts, opinions, and

perspectives if they want to move toward resolution.

Environmental obstacles (the next circle out)—the

atmosphere in which the conflict is taking place; the

physical space, office politics, individual moods, and

company culture can all have an effect on the resolution

process.

Relationship obstacles (the next circle out)—issues between

the people involved in the conflict; prior unresolved legacies

or events among the parties, their reputation, or even

position in the organization may affect how people work

through conflict.

Individual obstacles (the outermost circle)—issues that are

specific to each person in the conflict; individual

experiences, IQ, EQ, knowledge, self-esteem, and even

values and motives all play a part in causing and eventually

resolving conflict.

Lencioni explains that the key to this model is to understand that

these obstacles exist during discussions.  When a conflict arises

because of a particular obstacle, the group should consider the

model to decide whether to address the issue.  Lencioni contends

that if parties choose not to address and resolve an issue, they

should agree not to let it affect their ability to resolve the larger

conflict.

Lencioni also states that obstacles at the outside of the circle are

more difficult to resolve, largely because they involve

personalities and other issues that are not easy to change.  In this

way, this conflict resolution model resembles Furlong’s Circle of

Conflict model as they both reveal hot-button issues managers

should avoid when attempting to resolve conflict.  Certainly, the

57

issues toward the outside of the circle in Lencioni’s model and

those in the top half of Furlong’s model are the most challenging. 

Parties that are able to talk about these types of issues must trust

each other because doing so involves some type of personal risk.

Clearly, the methods available to resolve conflicts are numerous. 

There is certainly no right or wrong way to solve a problem.  What

is right for one conflict may be wrong for another; it all depends

on the situation and variables involved.

The two conflict resolution models presented here illustrate that

conflict most often happens when the emphasis is on differences

between people.  In their book Dealing With People You Can’t

Stand, authors Dr. Rick Brinkman and Dr. Rick Kirschner cleverly

describe it this way, “United we stand, divided we can’t stand

each other”.  In short, when people concentrate on what they

have in common with one another instead of their differences,

relationships run smoothly and conflict is significantly minimized.

Managed Conflict Out of Control ConflictStrengthens relationships and

builds teamwork

Damages relationships and

discourages cooperation

Encourages open communication

and cooperative problem-solving

Results in defensiveness and

hidden agendas

Resolves disagreements quickly

and increases productivity

Wastes time, money and

human resources

Deals with real issues and

concentrates on win-win

resolution

Focuses on fault-finding and

blaming

Makes allies and diffuses anger Creates enemies and hard

feelings

Airs all sides of an issue in a

positive, supportive environment

Is frustrating, stress producing

and energy draining

Calms and focuses toward results Is often loud, hostile and

58

chaotic

CONFLICT ANALYSIS: SEEING THE CONFLICT CLEARLY

Looking at conflict to gain perspective, understanding, insight and clarity.

The origins of the conflict Who are the parties

who is the conflict between

(individuals, groups, within a

group)

cultures of the parties (race,

gender, socioeconomic status,

ethnicity, religion, sexual

orientation, occupation, age)

Conflict sources/triggers How can conflict be described, how do

you know this is a source of the conflict?

relationship,

value,

data,

interests,

structure

Type of conflict Based solely on mix- perception or

(communication)

Does it exist in fixed conditions

(i.e. in order for resolution there

has to be some change in external

59

conditions)

Is the conflict dependent on

conditions that can be easily

changed

Is the expressed conflict really

the central conflict

Is the conflict being expressed

between the right people

Is the real conflict submerged

not yet occurring

Achieving a satisfying

resolution

This will not be part of your

final analysis, but are

important questions for you

to consider as you decide

how you will manage this

conflict differently and the

tools that you will use

are the parties identifying their

interests

are the parties acknowledging

their needs

interests are stated not assumed

everyone’s interests are explored

positions are distinguished from

interests

interests not positions are the

focus of the conversation

Conflict Management Styles

The Competing Shark

Sharks use a forcing or competing conflict management style

sharks are highly goal-oriented

Relationships take on a lower priority

60

Sharks do not hesitate to use aggressive behaviour to resolve

conflicts

Sharks can be autocratic, authoritative, and uncooperative;

threatening and intimidating

Sharks have a need to win; therefore others must lose,

creating win-lose situations

Advantage: If the shark's decision is correct, a better decision

without compromise can result

Disadvantage: May breed hostility and resentment toward the

person using it

Appropriate times to use a Shark style

when conflict involves personal differences that are difficult to

change

when fostering intimate or supportive relationships is not

critical

when others are likely to take advantage of non-competitive

behaviour

when conflict resolution is urgent; when decision is vital in

crisis

when unpopular decisions need to be implemented

The Avoiding Turtle

Turtles adopt an avoiding or withdrawing conflict

management style

Turtles would rather hide and ignore conflict than resolve it;

this leads them uncooperative and unassertive

Turtles tend to give up personal goals and display passive

behaviour creating lose-lose situations

Advantage: may help to maintain relationships that would be

hurt by conflict resolution

61

Disadvantage: Conflicts remain unresolved, overuse of the

style leads to others walking over them

Appropriate times to use a Turtle Style:

when the stakes are not high or issue is trivial

when confrontation will hurt a working relationship

when there is little chance of satisfying your wants

when disruption outweighs benefit of conflict resolution

when gathering information is more important than an

immediate decision

when others can more effectively resolve the conflict

when time constraints demand a delay

The Accommodating Teddy Bear

Teddy bears use a smoothing or accommodating conflict

management style with emphasis on human relationships

Teddy bears ignore their own goals and resolve conflict by

giving into others; unassertive and cooperative creating a win-

lose (bear is loser) situation

Advantage: Accommodating maintains relationships

Disadvantage: Giving in may not be productive, bear may be

taken advantage of

Appropriate times to use a Teddy Bear Style

when maintaining the relationship outweighs other

considerations

when suggestions/changes are not important to the

accommodator

when minimizing losses in situations where outmatched or

losing

when time is limited or when harmony and stability are valued

62

The Compromising Fox

Foxes use a compromising conflict management style;

concern is for goals and relationships

Foxes are willing to sacrifice some of their goals while

persuading others to give up part of theirs

Compromise is assertive and cooperative-result is either win-

lose or lose-lose

Advantage: relationships are maintained and conflicts are

removed

Disadvantage: compromise may create less than ideal

outcome and game playing can result

Appropriate times to use a Fox Style

when important/complex issues leave no clear or simple

solutions

when all conflicting people are equal in power and have strong

interests in different solutions

when their are no time restraints

The Collaborating Owl

Owls use a collaborating or problem confronting conflict

management style valuing their goals and relationships

Owls view conflicts as problems to be solved finding solutions

agreeable to all sides (win-win)

Advantage: both sides get what they want and negative

feelings eliminated

Disadvantage: takes a great deal of time and effort

63

Appropriate times to use an Owl Style

when maintaining relationships is important

when time is not a concern

when peer conflict is involved

when trying to gain commitment through consensus building

when learning and trying to merge differing perspectives

HANDLING CONFLICT AT WORK

Get used to it!  Conflict is everywhere.  It is natural to disagree, and

conflict often results from the interaction of people and groups with

different values, perspectives and beliefs.  It can be rooted in

factions or rivalries or in the polarized approaches of strong

personalities.  Sometimes it can come from the frustration of trying

to discuss or resolve an issue before the time is right.  Whatever the

source of your particular conflict, you cannot know how to handle

these confrontations without understanding their roots.  Let’s break

it down:

We all have needs, and when someone ignores our

needs, we feel frustrated and argumentative.  On the

other hand, we may withdraw, and try to undermine the

process without confrontation.  Don’t confuse ‘needs’ with

what you may ‘want’.  They are two different things. 

Nourishment is a basic ‘need’.  Without food, we cannot

survive for long.  However, if you said you ‘needed’ chocolate,

I would argue that point.

64

Reality is a strange thing!  Ideally, it is the same for

everyone, but that is rarely the case.  If you put a group of 10

people together, and asked them about the weather, you

would get differing opinions on the severity, the temperature,

the wind, the humidity.  We all ‘perceive’ things different and

to the extent that we think something is important or trivial,

there is the potential for conflict.

Each person has their own paradigm – a set of beliefs

or principles we hold as truth.  When we talk about an

issue with someone who has incompatible or shifting values,

there is the potential for conflict, especially if we insist that

ours is the only correct opinion. 

Just such a trigger has started many religious and political wars! 

Human beings are emotional creatures.  We depend on our feelings

to tell us what our ‘gut’ reaction is and sometimes we let them loose

under the wrong circumstances, when cooler heads should prevail.

How one defines and uses power is important in

conflict.  Some people feel that they must always come out

on top in order to prove their superiority or just because they

are always right, while others do not take confrontation well

and they will give the power away to the one who cries the

loudest, without agreeing with their position.  These more

passive people may still create problems but quietly trying to

undermine the solution that the stronger person pushed

through.  So, be careful not to discount the quiet ones.  This

power struggle scenario has a definite affect on how conflict is

managed.  Conflicts arise when one or more people try to

make others change their mind and vote a certain way or

65

when the stronger party tries to take unfair advantage of the

weaker party.

However, conflict is not always negative.  It can be

healthy if it is managed effectively.  Putting people with

diverse opinions in the same room will bring forth a richer

solution, but only if the conflict is managed.  This well-

facilitated conflict can result in unexpected growth, ingenious

solutions to problems, new angles on solutions and many

more options from which to choose.

When a group gets together, the first thing you need to

think about is whether you have the right people in the

room to solve a problem.  There is nothing worse than

being stuck in conflict that the group cannot resolve because

decision-makers are missing from the room during the

discussion. 

Write your ground rules on a board and refer to them if

people violate them.  Everyone’s opinion counts.  There are

no stupid ideas.  We will hear and explore every idea that is

presented.  We will not judge others or their opinions in

advance based on what we think we know of them, even if we

work with them every day.  We will consider all ideas

objectively and in a non-judgmental manner.  We will not

engage in bullying behaviour, or create or encourage factions

within the group.  You get the idea.  Come up with your own

ground rules and make it abundantly clear that this group will

66

play by the rules with NO exceptions.  When conflict does

arise, you can use the following steps to manage the issue:

Analyze the nature and type of conflict.  Ask questions to

better understand the positions and give everyone a chance

to talk.  Write the FACTS on a blackboard or flip chart and stay

away from emotional, subjective statements or inflammatory

remarks.  Just the facts!

Select a strategy to deal with the conflict.  If you can’t

resolve it by taking it apart and carefully drawing conclusions,

then consider involving a neutral facilitator to get the group

moving toward consensus.  If the group members are too

familiar with each other and know how to ‘push the buttons’

an outside may be the best medicine and can provide a firm

hand.

Reinforce the collaborative approach and strive for a

‘win-win’ result.  Use objective criteria for ranking ideas. 

Don’t just throw out an idea because someone says, “That is

stupid”.

Keep your common interests in mind – not the methods

by which you will achieve the interests, but the vision or goal

itself.  Don’t let the group be caught up in a power struggle

67

over ‘how’.  Identify options so that everyone is involved and

then let the group discuss and recommend the best

approach.  You may be able to make some trade-offs, or

combine aspects from various options to come up with

something that everyone likes.

Look for ways to compromise.  Not everything is critical. 

Encourage the team to give and take.  I’ll accept this if you

give me that.  Remember to focus on the result and the

outcome.  The group is trying to accomplish a task or come up

with a solution to a problem.  Don’t get so caught up in your

conflict that the team produces a poor solution – or no solution

at all!

Be sure that the entire group signs up for the solution

you choose.  You may even want to have every group

member sign a commitment document.

Finally, monitor your team to ensure you are moving in the right

direction and keep an eye open for the following dynamic

combinations.  Any of these can bring your team to its knees:

Win/Lose – one person or group is determined to win, and

does not care about the input or concerns of the other person

or group.  This happens when basic rights or values are at

stake and it can result in retaliation by the losers, and endless

cycle of ‘one-upsmanship’.  You’ll never get anything done!

68

Lose/Win – when an issue is more important to one group

than to another group or individual, the apathetic person or

group may give in just as a gesture of good will, thinking that

the issue doesn’t matter all that much anyway.  If the topic is

on the table for debate and it is important to the business,

then everyone HAS to care, whether they want to, or not!

Lose/Lose – if the issue is not important to anyone or there

are more critical things to think about, a person or group may

make a decision without any thought or focus.  This scenario

can also occur when a confrontation could have devastating

results or when the group is making a decision without

enough information or without involving the right people.  No

one wins

HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT

This advice is aimed primarily at resolving differences between

individuals, small groups and organisations, but many of the same

principles apply to the resolution of conflict between communities

and even nations.

Although the principles are listed separately, it is possible to use

one followed by another or to use two or more at the same time.

Regard this advice as a tool box - use whatever seems appropriate

to your situation and, if one technique does not work, try another.

Be calm: Conflict usually engenders strong emotions and even

anger but, in such a state, you are unlikely to be particularly rational

or in the mood for compromise.

69

Always show respect: However much you disagree with someone,

attack the argument, not the person. To use a sporting metaphor:

play the ball, not the man. As Nelson Mandela explained in his

autobiography "Long Walk to Freedom": "I defeated my

opponents without dishonouring them".

Be magnanimous: In truth, most conflict is over matters of little

substance and often it is mostly pride or status that is at stake.

Consider conceding the point to your opponent. This will save you

time and energy and you can concentrate on the important issues of

difference rather than the smaller ones. Also, if your concession is

done with good grace and even some humour, it will disarm your

opponent and make him/her look small-minded by comparison.

Discuss or debate: So often, conflict is created and/or maintained

because there is no real discussion or debate. We make

assumptions about the other person's point of view and willingness

to compromise which might be quite wrong. We avoid discussion or

debate either because we fear conflict (the situation will rarely be as

bad as you fear) or we worry about 'losing' (in which case, you've

already 'lost').

Apply rationality: Much conflict is not about substance but

perception. Try to clear through the perception to discover and

agree on how things really are. You won't manage this without

discussion and you may need to research the facts and seek

evidence. What is really worrying the other person? Has another

person or company had a similar experience which might prove

revealing and helpful?

Acknowledge emotions: Facts alone - however rational - cannot

resolve much conflict because how people perceive those facts is

coloured by their emotions. It's no good denying those emotions, so

make an effort to see the situation the way the other person does

70

and to acknowledge their emotions before endeavouring to move

beyond them. One way of doing this is to use phrases such as "Let

me try to explain how I see things" or "Please allow me to explain

why this is so important to me". Then reverse these points: "I would

like to understand better how you see this situation" and "Please

explain to me what is important to you in this problem".

Be aware of displacement: Especially where anger is concerned,

sometimes the source of a conflict is not what it appears to be, as

anger is displaced. In the domestic context, for instance, an

argument about the washing up could in fact be an argument about

lack of affection. It's not easy to spot displacement, but a warning

sign is when matters that does not normally because conflict now

appears to do so.

Be precise: Someone might propose that something be done

"sooner rather than later". His colleague might react against this

assuming that we are talking of matter of weeks. When asked what

exactly is meant, it might be that the first person explains that he

had in mind a programme of several months - so, no argument. It

might be necessary to make savings in the family budget. Instead of

throwing everything into doubt and caused unnecessary upset, be

focused. Perhaps it will be necessary to cancel some subscriptions

or to postpone a planned holiday for a year.

Think creatively: Try presenting different types of solution from

those so far rejected by one of the parties. For example, in the

Sunning dale talks on the future of Northern Ireland in 1973, the

British and Irish Governments both wanted their view on the

constitutional status of Northern Ireland to be stated first in the

agreement; the solution was to divide the page in two and present

the two statements side by side, so that they both had equal status.

In a particularly tough set of negotiations that I led as a national

trade union official, I would not accept certain words in the proposed

71

agreement but I allowed them to be used in the covering letter to

the agreement.

Change the wording: It's amazing how often we disagree about

words and how a change of words can change how people view a

situation. Instead of criticising a work colleague for "a mistake",

perhaps you could invite him to discuss "a learning opportunity". If

two parties to a dispute don't like their eventual agreement to be

called an agreement, try calling it a settlement or a resolution or a

concordat.

Change the environment: It's no coincidence that some of the

toughest political negotiations of all times - for instance those

between the Israelis and the Palestinians - often take place in

locations like Camp David in the USA or a wood in Scandinavia. I

was a professional trade union official for 24 years and many of the

most productive negotiations between management and union took

place in a neutral venue like a hotel. Sometimes even simply

moving from an office to a coffee bar or from a house to a

restaurant can make all the difference.

Compromise: This is an obvious point but frequently neglected. If

you can't agree on whether to see a romantic comedy or an action

thriller at the cinema, see one film this weekend and the other the

next weekend. If you can't agree on whether to have a city holiday

or a beach holiday, try a two-centre break.

Consider staging: Much conflict is about change. Introducing

change in stages often makes it more palatable to the person

uncomfortable about it (and can make it more manageable for the

person promoting it).

Consider sequencing: Much conflict is created and/or aggravated

by lack of trust. Building trust takes time and proof of goodwill. So

72

consider introducing an agreement in stages whereby each action is

dependent on another action.

Experiment or test: Too often we argue in ignorance, convinced

that our prescription or proposal is the best with no real evidence.

Have a trial and review how things go or try two or three ways of

doing something and have an honest appraisal of what works best.

Seek mediation: This is a process whereby a neutral third party

consults with those involved in a conflict to see if the problem can

be presented in a way which facilitates a resolution. The mediator

may simply listen and ask questions or he/she may suggest other

ways of looking at the problem or even possible solutions.

Classically this is approach used in most relationship counselling.

Seek conciliation: This is a similar process to mediation but a little

more activist on the part of the third party who will normally

attempt to find a solution by proposing a 'third way'.

Seek arbitration: This is a process involving a third party who,

from the beginning, is invited by the conflicting parties to propose a

solution. The two parties may have originally agreed merely to

consider the proposed solution (non-binding arbitration) or they may

have agreed in advance to accept the decision of the arbitrator

(binding arbitration). This approach is often used in industrial

disputes.

If absolutely necessary, apply authority or force. If mediation,

conciliation and arbitration do not work or the parties are not willing

to try them, conflict can be resolved in a fashion by one party

imposing his/her solution through authority (she is the parent or he

is the line manager) or through force (calling in the police or

obtaining a legal injunction). Such a 'settlement' will cause

resentment in the party at the receiving end, but sometimes this is

the only way to resolve a conflict and move on. I can tell you - as a

73

former trade union negotiator - that sometimes people in conflict

want someone to impose a solution, not because they themselves

oppose the solution but because they do not want to lose 'face' or

be seen by their constituents to have 'given in'.

If all else fails, wait. Most problems change over time. Either the

problem solves itself because circumstances change or one's

attitude to the problem changes as the heat dies down and other

matters assume more prominence. Therefore, if one cannot solve a

dispute and its resolution can wait, maybe the best approach is to

leave things alone for a while.

Accept the situation: Conflict is not like mathematics. There is not

always a solution waiting to be found and, if there is a solution, it is

unlikely to be the only one. The Swiss psychologist Carl Jung once

wrote that "The greatest and most important problems of life are all

fundamentally insoluble. They can never be solved but only

outgrown."

Finally, although this advice is about resolving conflict, be aware

that conflict cannot always be avoided (especially when

fundamental differences, as opposed to perceived differences, are

involved) and not all conflict is negative (sometimes it 'clears the

air'). The important thing is to keep wasteful and damaging conflict

to a minimum and, when it does occur, use the relevant techniques

to resolve or at least ease it.

Resolving conflict rationally and effectively

In many cases, conflict in the workplace just seems to be a fact of

life. We've all seen situations where different people with different

goals and needs have come into conflict. And we've all seen the

often-intense personal animosity that can result. The fact that

conflict exists, however, is not necessarily a bad thing: As long as it

74

is resolved effectively, it can lead to personal and professional

growth.

In many cases, effective conflict resolution skills can make the

difference between positive and negative outcomes.

The good news is that by resolving conflict successfully, you can

solve many of the problems that it has brought to the surface, as

well as getting benefits that you might not at first expect:

Increased understanding: The discussion needed to resolve

conflict expands people's awareness of the situation, giving

them an insight into how they can achieve their own goals

without undermining those of other people;

Increased group cohesion: When conflict is resolved

effectively, team members can develop stronger mutual

respect, and a renewed faith in their ability to work together;

and

Improved self-knowledge: Conflict pushes individuals to

examine their goals in close detail, helping them understand

the things that are most important to them, sharpening their

focus, and enhancing their effectiveness.

However, if conflict is not handled effectively, the results can be

damaging. Conflicting goals can quickly turn into personal dislike.

Teamwork breaks down. Talent is wasted as people disengage from

their work. And it's easy to end up in a vicious downward spiral of

negativity and recrimination. If you're to keep your team or

organization working effectively, you need to stop this downward

spiral as soon as you can. To do this, it helps to understand two of

the theories that lie behind effective conflict resolution techniques:

75

Understanding the Theory: The "Interest-

Based Relational Approach"

The second theory is commonly referred to as the "Interest-Based

Relational (IBR) Approach". This conflict resolution strategy respects

individual differences while helping people avoid becoming too

entrenched in a fixed position.

In resolving conflict using this approach, you follow these rules:

Make sure that good relationships are the first priority:

As far as possible, make sure that you treat the other calmly

and that you try to build mutual respect. Do your best to be

courteous to one-another and remain constructive under

pressure;

Keep people and problems separate: Recognize that in

many cases the other person is not just "being difficult" – real

and valid differences can lie behind conflictive positions. By

separating the problem from the person, real issues can be

debated without damaging working relationships;

Pay attention to the interests that are being

presented: By listening carefully you'll most-likely

understand why the person is adopting his or her position;

Listen first; talk second: To solve a problem effectively you

have to understand where the other person is coming from

before defending your own position;

Set out the “Facts”: Agree and establish the objective,

observable elements that will have an impact on the decision;

and

76

Using the Tool: A Conflict Resolution

Process

Based on these approaches, a starting point for dealing with conflict

is to identify the overriding conflict style employed by yourself, your

team or your organization. Over time, people's conflict management

styles tend to mesh, and a “right” way to solve conflict emerges. It's

good to recognize when this style can be used effectively, however

make sure that people understand that different styles may suit

different situations.

Look at the circumstances, and think about the style that may be

appropriate. Then use the process below to resolve conflict.

STEP ONE: SET THE SCENE.

If appropriate to the situation, agree the rules of the IBR Approach

(or at least consider using the approach yourself.) Make sure that

people understand that the conflict may be a mutual problem, which

may be best resolved through discussion and negotiation rather

than through raw aggression.

If you are involved in the conflict, emphasize the fact that you are

presenting your perception of the problem. Use active listening skills

to ensure you hear and understand other’s positions and

perceptions.

Restate

Paraphrase

Summarize

And make sure that when you talk, you're using an adult, assertive

approach rather than a submissive or aggressive style.

77

STEP TWO: GATHER INFORMATION.

Here you are trying to get to the underlying interests, needs, and

concerns. Ask for the other person’s viewpoint and confirm that you

respect his or her opinion and need his or her cooperation to solve

the problem Try to understand his or her motivations and goals, and

see how your actions may be affecting these. Also, try to

understand the conflict in objective terms:

Is it affecting work performance? Damaging the delivery to the

client? Disrupting team work? Hampering decision-making? or so on.

Be sure to focus on work issues and leave personalities out of the

discussion.

Listen with empathy and see the conflict from the other

person’s point of view

Identify issues clearly and concisely

Use “I” statements

Remain flexible

Clarify feelings

STEP THREE: AGREE THE PROBLEM.

This sounds like an obvious step, but often different underlying

needs, interests and goals can cause people to perceive problems

very differently. You'll need to agree the problems that you are

trying to solve before you'll find a mutually acceptable solution.

Sometimes different people will see different but interlocking

problems - if you can't reach a common perception of the problem,

then at the very least, you need to understand what the other

person sees as the problem.

STEP FOUR: BRAINSTORM POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.

78

If everyone is going to feel satisfied with the resolution, it will help if

everyone has had fair input in generating solutions. Brainstorm

possible solutions, and be open to all ideas, including ones you

never considered before.

STEP FIVE: NEGOTIATE A SOLUTION

By this stage, the conflict may be resolved: Both sides may better

understand the position of the other, and a mutually satisfactory

solution may be clear to all. However you may also have uncovered

real differences between your positions. This is where a technique

like win-win negotiation can be useful to find a solution that, at least

to some extent, satisfies everyone. There are three guiding

principles here: Be Calm, Be Patient, Have Respect…

Key Points

Conflict in the workplace can be incredibly destructive to good

teamwork. Managed in the wrong way, real and legitimate

differences between people can quickly spiral out of control,

resulting in situations where co-operation breaks down and the

team's mission is threatened. This is particularly the case where the

wrong approaches to conflict resolution are used.

A CASE STUDY ON “AVOIDANCE” AS A

METHOD OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

“Avoidance is characterized by behaviour where one party may

recognise that a conflict exists but chooses to withdraw from it or to

suppress it. This style therefore involves ignoring conflicts in the

79

hope that they will go away; putting problems on hold, invoking slow

procedures to stifle contact, using secrecy to avoid confrontation

and appealing to bureaucratic rules to resolve conflict.

It is the desire to evade the overt demonstration of the

disagreement or indifference that can result in withdrawal. If

withdrawal is not possible or desirable, the individual may suppress

it without airing their differences. Avoidance can be considered as a

powerful tool in conflict resolution. At a superficial level it may

appear that in seeking to avoid contact with the perceived

“opposition”/ situation pertaining to the conflict, we are behaving in

a non-assertive/ passive manner giving control to the “opposition”

and that we have “essentially given up responsibility for ourselves

and our actions.”

A more in-depth analysis reveals that some forms of avoidance

behaviour are distinctively active. Through avoidance one may

actively achieve one’s goals- although they may be distinct from the

goals of the organization/ individual one is opposing. RICHARDSON

has discussed a case to highlight that avoidance is an active mode

of conflict resolution. The case is follows:

The study was conducted in the Stapleton Educational Institute

(SEI), Singapore to understand avoidance as a mode of conflict

resolution and its effect on group dynamics.

The organization discussed here, offered degree courses on

management and economics to both full and part-time students.

The teacher-student ratio was unbalanced in the sense that the stag

was less compared to the large number of students. It resulted

heavy work load for lecturers and administrative staff. Since both,

full and part-time courses were offered (evenings and weekends),

hours were long and the majority of staffs worked six day a week.

80

To add to this, there were several intakes for courses, which

resulted in no clear terms or holiday periods- this was very different

from other educational institutions. The holiday issue was a source

of much contention between staff and management- the former

having been accustomed to the usual fixed holiday structure of

academic employment. Also, there was a cultural dimension to add

to the existing difficulties.

The majority of the academic staff was expatriates recruited on

the ;principle that an expatriate lecturing team would be an

excellent marketing tool, which market research had proved correct.

This, however, brought with it specific difficulties, such as, cultural

adaptation to students and management strategy, higher salaries

commanded by expatriate staff. It led to heavy teaching loads/

limited vacation time.

Clearly there were a number of potential areas for conflict, such as

desire to earn more, heavy teaching loads and limited vacation

time. It was observed that lack of trust from management,

administration/ faculty relations, general style of management were

other issues leading to a great deal of conflict within the

organization.

The staff avoided overt demonstration of disagreement but

expressed in terms of appeals regarding time-off and lecturing

hours were done by making specific reference to bureaucratic rulers

rather than by open discussion.” Closed” discussions were held

among staff about management strategies and employee

frustrations.

Secrecy was maintained where applications for posts elsewhere

were made and academic staff using the company’s facilities

provided extra tuition, but income was not declared. Informal staff

81

gatherings frequently resulted in airing grievances and complaints

among themselves rather than confronting management, which in

some way served as a release.

Senior academic staff adopted a different method of avoidance for

being apathetic and reluctant to be involved in new projects. If

required to do so as a result of contractual duties, they did so with

minimal interest. All staff demonstrated general characteristics of

avoidance as a means of resolving the conflict they experienced

both as a group and as individuals.

In this case, it was observed that the staffs were avoiding conflict

but their avoidance had positive outcomes for themselves as

individuals and for uniting them as a team. It gave them a common

identity and sense of unity. Collective avoidance, because of its

positive outcomes, became the impetus for increasing and

maintaining group relations. But avoidance as a method of conflict

resolution is not recommended for the development of a healthy

organization.

In the case of SEI, staffs were avoiding and as a result, cohesion

and solidarity were increasing, but the avoidance and resultant

team building were detrimental to the well-being of the organization

as a whole. Ina positive sense, the group dynamic was becoming

stronger- the individual differences had been reconciled and

replaced by a common aim to help one another in terms of support

for the present and future-but the strengths and bonds created were

then being used against the well-being of the organization.

CONCLUSION

82

The classic view on conflict has always been that conflict in any

form is harmful and should be avoided at all cost. However, modern

scholars and the corporate world at large are fast realizing that

conflict is not as lethal as considered to be and if maintained within

certain parameters, it can actually boost a company’s growth.

This project tells exactly how and when a conflict can be translated

into a successful process and when it should be checked before it

spells trouble for the company. It covers cases from all the essential

areas of conflict and analytically discusses every aspect while

striking a clear balance between theory, concept and application.

This project is an attempt to expose varied perspectives, to

challenge their individual positions and ideologies, and to inspire,

inform and train them in the field.

83