Chapter 8

CONFLICT

AND

NEGOTIATION

Conflict and

Negotiation in

the Workplace

McGraw-Hill/Irwin

McShane/Von Glinow OB

5eCopyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights

reserved.

Cross-Generational Conflict

To reward themselves for a

job well done, Generation-Y

(Millennial) employees

might throw a pizza party

during office hours, but this

practice bothers older

employees who have

different views about

appropriate workplace

behavior.

11-3

Conflict Defined

The process in which one

party perceives that its

interests are being opposed

or negatively affected by

another party

11-4

Is Conflict Good or Bad?:Pre 1970s View

Historically, experts viewed

conflict as dysfunctional

• Undermined relations

• Wasted human energy

• More job dissatisfaction,

turnover, stress

• Less productivity,

information sharing

Level of conflict

Conflic

t outc

om

es

Bad

Good

Low High

0

11-5

Is Conflict Good or Bad?: 1970s-1990s View

1970s to 1990s – belief in an

optimal level of conflict

Some level of conflict is good

because:

• Energizes debate

• Reexamine assumptions

• Improves responsiveness to

external environment

• Increases team cohesion

Level of conflict

Conflic

t outc

om

es

Bad

Good

Low High

0

Optimal

conflict

11-6

Is Conflict Good or Bad?:Emerging View

Two types of conflict

• Constructive conflict -- Conflict is aimed at issue,

not parties

• Relationship conflict -- Conflict is aimed at

undermining the other party

11-7

Is Conflict Good or Bad?:Emerging View

Goal: encourage

constructive conflict,

minimize relationship

conflict

Problem: difficult to

separate constructive from

relationship conflict

• Drive to defend activated

when ideas are critiqued

Level of conflict

Conflic

t outc

om

es

Bad

Good

Low High

0

Constructive

conflict

Relationship

conflict

11-8

Constructive Confrontation at Intel

Intel employees learn to fully evaluate ideas

through “constructive confrontation.” The objective

is to attack the problem, not the employee, but

some critics claim the process is a license for

some Intel staff to be bullies.

11-9

Minimizing Relationship Conflict

Three conditions that minimize relationship conflict

while engaging in constructive conflict

1. Emotional intelligence

2. Cohesive team

3. Supportive team norms

11-10

The Conflict Process

Sources of

Conflict

Manifest

Conflict

Conflict

Outcomes

Conflict

Perceptions

Conflict

Emotions

Conflict

Escalation Cycle

11-11

Differentiation

Task

Interdependence

• Different values/beliefs

• Explains cross-cultural and generational conflict

• Conflict increases with interdependence

• Parties more likely to interfere with each other

Incompatible

Goals

• One party’s goals perceived to interfere

with other’s goals

more

Structural Sources of Conflict

11-12

Ambiguous

Rules

Communication

Problems

• Creates uncertainty, threatens goals

• Without rules, people rely on politics

• Increases stereotyping

• Reduces motivation to communicate

• Escalates conflict when arrogant

Scarce

Resources• Motivates competition for the resource

Structural Sources of Conflict

11-13

Interpersonal Conflict Handling Styles

Win-win orientation

• believe parties will find a mutually beneficial

solution

Win-lose orientation

• belief that the more one party receives, the less the

other receives

11-14

Assert

iven

ess

Cooperativeness

Forcing Problem-solving

Compromising

Avoiding Yielding

High

Low High

Five Conflict Handling Styles

11-15

Conflict Handling Contingencies

Problem solving• Best when:

- Interests are not perfectly opposing

- Parties have trust/openness

- Issues are complex

• Problem: other party take advantage of information

Forcing• Best when:

- you have a deep conviction about your position

- quick resolution required

- other party would take advantage of cooperation

• Problems: relationship conflict, long-term relations

11-16

Conflict Handling Contingencies

Avoiding

• Best when:

- relationship conflict is high

- conflict resolution cost is higher than benefits

• Problems: doesn’t resolve conflict, frustration

Yielding

• Best when:

- other party has much more power

- issue is much less important to you than other party

- value/logic of your position is imperfect

• Problem: Increases other party’s expectations

11-17

Conflict Handling Contingencies

Compromising

• Best when…

- Parties have equal power

- Quick solution is required

- Parties lack trust/openness

• Problem: Sub-optimal solution where mutual gains

are possible

11-18

Structural Approaches to Conflict Resolution

1. Emphasizing superordinate goals

• Emphasize common objective rather than

conflicting sub-goals

• Reduces goal incompatibility and differentiation

2. Reducing differentiation

• Remove sources of different values and beliefs

- e.g. Move employees around to different jobs

11-19

Structural Approaches to Conflict Resolution (con’t)

3. Improving communication/understanding

• Employees understand and appreciate each

other’s views through communication

- Relates to contact hypothesis

• Two warnings:

a) Apply communication/understanding after reducing

differentiation

b) A Western strategy that may conflict with

values/traditions in other cultures

11-20

Structural Approaches to Conflict Resolution (con’t)

4. Reduce Task Interdependence

• Dividing shared resources

• Combine tasks

• Use buffers

5. Increase Resources

• Duplicate resources

6. Clarify Rules and Procedures

• Clarify resource distribution

• Change interdependence

11-21

Resolving Conflict Through Negotiation

Negotiation -- attempting to resolve divergent

goals by redefining terms of interdependence

Which conflict handling style is best in

negotiation?

• Begin cautiously with problem-solving style

• Shift to a win-lose style when

- Mutual gains situation isn’t apparent

- Other part won’t reciprocate info sharing

11-22

Your Positions

Initial Target

InitialTarget

Opponent’s Positions

Area ofPotential

Agreement

Bargaining Zone Model

Resistance

Resistance

11-23

Situational Influences on Negotiation

Location

Physical setting

Time passage and

deadlines

Audience

Courtesy of Microsoft

11-24

Effective Negotiation Behavior

Preparation and goal

setting

Gathering information

Communicating

effectively

Making concessions

Courtesy of Microsoft

11-25

Types of Third Party Intervention

Mediation

Arbitration

Inquisition

Level of

Process

Control

Level of Outcome Control

High

HighLow

11-26

Choosing the Best 3rd Party Strategy

Managers prefer inquisitional strategy, but not

usually best approach

Mediation potentially offers highest

satisfaction with process and outcomes

Use arbitration when mediation fails

11-27

Conflict and

Negotiation in

the Workplace

11-28McGraw-Hill/Irwin

McShane/Von Glinow OB

5e

Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights

reserved.