Kelli J. Schutte William Jewell College
Robbins & Judge
Organizational Behavior 14th Edition
Conflict and Negotiation
14-0 Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Chapter Learning Objectives
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
– Define conflict.
– Differentiate between the traditional, human relations, and
interactionist views of conflict.
– Outline the conflict process.
– Define negotiation.
– Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
– Apply the five steps in the negotiation process.
– Show how individual differences influence negotiations.
– Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations.
– Describe cultural differences in negotiations.
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-1
Conflict Defined
A process that begins when one party perceives that
another party has negatively affected, or is about to
negatively affect, something that the first party cares
about
– That point in an ongoing activity when an interaction
“crosses over” to become an interparty conflict
Encompasses a wide range of conflicts that people
experience in organizations
– Incompatibility of goals
– Differences over interpretations of facts
– Disagreements based on behavioral expectations
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-2
Transitions in Conflict Thought
Traditional View of Conflict
– The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be avoided
– Prevalent view in the 1930s-1940s
Conflict resulted from:
– Poor communication
– Lack of openness
– Failure to respond to employee needs
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-3
Continued Transitions in Conflict Thought
Human Relations View of Conflict
– The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome in
any group
– Prevalent from the late 1940s through mid-1970s
Interactionist View of Conflict
– The belief that conflict is not only a positive force in a group
but that it is absolutely necessary for a group to perform
effectively
– Current view
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-4
Forms of Interactionist Conflict
Functional Conflict
• Conflict that supports the goals of the group and improves its performance
Dysfunctional Conflict
• Conflict that hinders group performance
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-5
Types of Interactionist Conflict
Task Conflict
– Conflicts over content and goals of the work
– Low-to-moderate levels of this type are
FUNCTIONAL
Relationship Conflict
– Conflict based on interpersonal relationships
– Almost always DYSFUNCTIONAL
Process Conflict
– Conflict over how work gets done
– Low levels of this type are FUNCTIONAL
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-6
The Conflict Process
We will focus on each step in a moment…
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-7
E X H I B I T 14-1
Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility
Communication
– Semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, over
communication and “noise”
Structure
– Size and specialization of jobs
– Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity
– Member/goal incompatibility
– Leadership styles (close or participative)
– Reward systems (win-lose)
– Dependence/interdependence of groups
Personal Variables
– Differing individual value systems
– Personality types
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-8
Stage II: Cognition and Personalization
Important stage for two reasons:
1. Conflict is defined
• Perceived Conflict
– Awareness by one or more parties of the existence of
conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise
2. Emotions are expressed that have a strong impact on the
eventual outcome
• Felt Conflict
– Emotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety,
tenseness, frustration, or hostility
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-9
Stage III: Intentions
Intentions
– Decisions to act in a given way
– Note: behavior does not always accurately reflect intent
Dimensions of conflict-handling intentions:
– Cooperativeness
• Attempting to satisfy
the other party’s
concerns
– Assertiveness
• Attempting to satisfy
one’s own concerns
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-10
E X H I B I T 14-2
Source: K. Thomas, “Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations,” in M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., vol. 3 (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992), p. 668. With permission.
Stage IV: Behavior
Conflict Management
– The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve
the desired level of conflict
Conflict-Intensity Continuum
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-11
E X H I B I T 14-3
Source: Based on S.P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 93–
97; and F. Glasi, “The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of Third Parties,” in G.B.J. Bomers and R. Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management
and Industrial Relations (Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982), pp. 119–40.
Conflict Resolution Techniques
– Problem solving
– Superordinate goals
– Expansion of resources
– Avoidance
– Smoothing
– Compromise
– Authoritative command
– Altering the human variable
– Altering the structural variables
– Communication
– Bringing in outsiders
– Restructuring the organization
– Appointing a devil’s advocate
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-12
E X H I B I T 14-4
Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp.
59–89
Stage V: Outcomes
Functional
– Increased group performance
– Improved quality of decisions
– Stimulation of creativity and innovation
– Encouragement of interest and curiosity
– Provision of a medium for problem solving
– Creation of an environment for self-evaluation and change
Dysfunctional
– Development of discontent
– Reduced group effectiveness
– Retarded communication
– Reduced group cohesiveness
– Infighting among group members overcomes group goals
Creating Functional Conflict
– Reward dissent and punish conflict avoiders
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-13
Negotiation
Negotiation (Bargaining)
– A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for them
Two General Approaches:
– Distributive Bargaining
• Negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed amount of
resources; a win-lose situation
– Integrative Bargaining
• Negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create
a win-win solution
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-14
Distributive versus Integrative Bargaining
Bargaining Characteristic Distributive
Bargaining Integrative Bargaining
Goal Get all the pie you can Expand the pie
Motivation Win-Lose Win-Win
Focus Positions Interests
Information Sharing Low High
Duration of Relationships Short-Term Long-Term
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-15
E X H I B I T 14-5
Mine Yours Mine Yours
Distributive
Integrative
Source: Based on R. J. Lewicki and J. A. Litterer,
Negotiation (Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1985), p. 280.
The Negotiation Process
BATNA
– The Best Alternative
To a Negotiated
Agreement
– The lowest acceptable
value (outcome) to an
individual for a
negotiated agreement
The “Bottom Line”
for negotiations
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-16
E X H I B I T 14-7
Individual Differences in Negotiation Effectiveness
Personality Traits
– Extroverts and agreeable people weaker at distributive negotiation – disagreeable introvert is best
– Intelligence is a weak indicator of effectiveness
Mood and Emotion
– Ability to show anger helps in distributive bargaining
– Positive moods and emotions help integrative bargaining
Gender
– Men and women negotiate the same way, but may experience different outcomes
– Women and men take on gender stereotypes in negotiations: tender and tough
– Women are less likely to negotiate
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-17
Third-Party Negotiations
Four Basic Third-Party Roles
– Mediator
• A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using
reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions for alternatives
– Arbitrator
• A third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an
agreement.
– Conciliator
• A trusted third party who provides an informal communication
link between the negotiator and the opponent
– Consultant
• An impartial third party, skilled in conflict management, who
attempts to facilitate creative problem solving through
communication and analysis
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 14-18
Global Implications
Conflict and Culture
– Japanese and U.S. managers view conflict differently
– U.S. managers are more likely to use competing tactics while
Japanese managers are likely to use compromise and
avoidance
Cultural Differences in Negotiations
– Multiple cross-cultural studies on negotiation styles, for
instance:
• American negotiators are more likely than Japanese bargainers
to make a first offer
• North Americans use facts to persuade, Arabs use emotion, and
Russians use asserted ideals
• Brazilians say “no” more often than Americans or Japanese
14-19 Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Summary and Managerial Implications
Conflict can be constructive or destructive
Reduce excessive conflict by using:
– Competition
– Collaboration
– Avoidance
– Accommodation
– Compromise
Integrative negotiation is a better long-term method
14-20 Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
E X H I B I T 14-8
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the
United States of America.
Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
14-21 Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall