Explain the Sources and Process of conflict.

Explain the Sources and Process of conflict. Discuss various conflict-avoidance strategies being followed by an organization, citing example from the organization you are working in or any organization you are familiar with. Briefly describe the organization you are referring to.

Solution : Sources and Process of conflict

By evaluating a conflict according to the five categories below -- relationship, data, interest, structural and value -- we can begin to determine the causes of a conflict and design resolution strategies that will have a higher probability of success.
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.
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."
Interest Conflicts
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.


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.
Value Conflicts
Value conflicts are caused by perceived or actual incompatible belief systems. Values are beliefs that people use to give meaning to their 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.
RESOLVING CONFLICT
The conflict resolution requires great managerial skills. Here we are trying to give a solution to a conflict turning it in a constructive side.
If one party exercises the principles of interaction, listens, and us the six steps of collaborative resolution, that party may be able to end the conflict constructively. At the very least, he or she may be able to prevent the conflict from turning into a fight by choosing an alternative to destructive interaction?"
There is a difference between resolving a conflict and managing conflict. Resolving a conflict ends the dispute by satisfying the interests of both parties. Managing a conflict contains specialized interaction that prevents a dispute from becoming a destructive battle. Managing a conflict attends to the personal issues so as to allow for a constructive relationship, even though the objective issues may not be resolvable.
For example, the former Soviet Union and the United States managed their conflict during the Cold War by using a variety of mechanisms. The objective issues in the dispute were not resolved, and neither were the personal issues, which contained significant perceptual differences. However, both sides attended significantly to the relationship to keep the disagreement from turning into a destructive battle.
Our goal in conflict always should be to seek a resolution based on mutual gain. Realistically, however, resolution is not always possible. When this is the case, we must manage the conflict to ensure that the relationship is constructive and that open communication is maintained. We Listen to Conflict to understand the other party and demonstrate the acceptance required to maintain the relationship
1. The Framework for conflict resolution
When conflicts arise, we assess a variety of factors before selecting our approach to the situation. We may choose to compete, or dominate, where we try to impose our will on the other side through physical or psychological means, or we may choose to accommodate, or surrender, and cede victory to the other side. Likewise, we may decide to withdraw by either doing nothing or refusing to participate in the conflict altogether, or we may collaborate and reach a constructive and mutually acceptable solution. And if none of those approaches proves effective, we might choose third-party intervention, a form of collaboration in which an individual or group external to the conflict intercedes to move both parties toward agreement.
While each of the above orientations represents a way to manage conflict, only two collaboration and third-party intervention-are, by definition, focused on mutual gain and resolution. These two approaches consider the interests of both parties and are most likely to use empathic listening as the primary tool to enhance understanding. The other methods deal unilaterally with the conflict and fail to manage the interdependence of the dispute.
In order to understand the mechanisms behind the four orientations to conflict, it is useful to examine how these orientations can be applied. The study of negotiation, one form of conflict resolution, provides two opposite approaches for dealing with disputes. Most often, we think of negotiation in the formal sense seen in the business or diplomatic environment, where two or more parties bargain to reach agreement. However, two types of negotiation, competitive bargaining and collaboration, also provide good models for understanding different ways of resolving our conflicts.
2. Competitive Bargaining
When most people think of negotiation, they think of competitive bargaining. In this type of negotiation, a seller asks for more than he expects and a buyer offers less than she is willing to pay. Then, through a series of concessions, the two sides meet somewhere in the middle where each side is reasonably satisfied. This form of negotiation also is frequently called distributive bargaining or concession-convergence. It maintains a competitive, win-lose orientation, with the goals of one party and the attainment of those goals in direct conflict with the goals of the other party. In other words, competitive bargaining is a positional conflict in which "winning" is determined by how much of the original position was obtained. The parties believe that resources are fixed and limited, and that they must battle to maximize their share of the wealth.
In competitive bargaining, each party uses strategy, tactics, and tricks to achieve its objective, and whether one of both parties will achieve their goal depends upon their ability to "play the game." Each party seeks to extract information from the other party that will help in identifying appropriate counteroffers, while revealing as little accurate information as possible about its own preferences. The final agreement often depends on the willingness of one party to stake out a tough and extreme position that causes the other party to make concessions. Labor management disputes and international negotiations often use this model of conflict resolution.
The competitive bargaining process is unappealing to many of us and often produces unwise agreements. Some of us simply do not have the skills or the temperament to play the game. We see the process as being unnecessary tough, deceitful, or manipulative. Perceptions of power & control also are a significant factor in the effectiveness of competitive bargaining. If you do not have the power in the relationship, or if you perceive that you do not, you are more likely to obtain an unsatisfactory resolution. Your lack of power will prevent you from using authority or aggression to resolve, or win, the dispute. In competitive bargaining this form of aggression is often played as a trump card to achieve the win for the party who is able to acquire the most power.
The positional approach of competitive bargaining also causes unnecessary issue rigidity. Our egos become so invested in our positions that we are prevented from accepting alternatives. Therefore, even if a better solution is created, it is unlikely that we will back down. Another problem with competitive bargaining is that it often ignores the personal issues that affect the resolution process. In competitive bargaining, we care about the other party's needs only as a means to identify an opportunity for trade.
For example, we will trade one day at the beach (the other party's need) for one day visiting museums (our need). But even if the trade satisfies one need, competitive bargaining still requires some amount of persuasion, deception, and manipulation if we are going to resolve all of the objective issues in a satisfactory manner. Over time, this usually breaks down the trust between the parties and places a significant strain on the relationship.
Competitive bargaining tends not to resolve conflict. It merely manages it for his short term. It is based on an attitude of limits and is fundamentally a process of reaching a settlement within a bargaining range. Both parties know that they are going to have to settle for something less than they would prefer, but they each hope that the deal will be better than their bottom line. Parties who do not think they got the best deal possible or who believe that they "lost" typically try to find ways to recoup their losses later. Even if one party believes that it "won," it still knows that it left something on the bargaining table and will try to acquire it in future negotiations. Labor and management, for example, may reach an agreement, but it is not long before they are back at the bargaining table, renegotiating issues that one or both sides thought had been settled previously.
There is an alternative that breaks the destructive cycle of competitive bargaining. It builds relationships and opens the door to constructive resolution. The alternative not only helps you correctly identify the objective issues, but also manages, if not resolves, the personal issues in the dispute. It is based on principles of interaction that endeavor to understand all of the underlying interests that must be satisfied to reach sustained agreement.
3. Collaboration
The collaborative approach to conflict resolution, also called mutual gains or integrative bargaining, argues for the possibility of solutions that all sides find acceptable. It embodies the notion of "win-win," a core component of our principle of mutual gain. Collaboration is about identifying a common, shared, or joint goal and developing a process to achieve it. It is a process in which both parties exchange information openly, defines their common problems, and creates options to solve these problems. And while the collaborative process cannot guarantee that agreement will always be reached, more often than not, the analysis of interests, needs, and desires helps the resolution process and ultimate agreement.
There are many reasons why people don't pursue this model of conflict resolution. First, people in conflict often do not recognize the potential for collaboration. This often is the result of an attitude of limits, either-or thinking, or a fixed-pie mentality. When parties remain positional or see only a limited number of solutions that will satisfy their interests, they do not use their creativity to solve the problem.
The history of the relationship between the two parties also can prevent collaboration. Over time, destructive conflict can build resentment, if not contempt. And, as John Gottman notes in Why Marriages Succeed or Fail (1994), contempt breeds the intent to "insult and psychologically abuse" the other party. This is not always major abuse; it may be small, nit-picking criticisms that add up over time. The personal issues become so overwhelming that the objective issues of the conflict cannot be examined, and parties often cannot be in the same room together, let alone identify ways of resolving the conflict.
Another barrier to collaboration relates to the complexity of most conflicts. Some elements are conducive to collaboration, and some elements require competitive bargaining. Each mode of conflict resolution requires different skill sets, and you can send mixed messages unless you handle them carefully.
Finally, people often have a lack of faith in their problem-solving ability. Parties that enter the resolution process believing that they can work together usually find a way to collaborate. Those who do not have a solid self-concept will be less willing to follow the Principles of interaction& use listening to seek collaborative resolution.
There are many obstacles that make collaboration more difficult. Given our inherent competitiveness and the various factors that surround many of our disputes, it is a wonder that constructive collaboration occurs at all. However, it does occur if one or both of the parties in conflict outcomes, the following conditions must be established at some point during the process:
Face-to-face interaction: The Listening to Conflict approach to dispute resolution requires developing an understanding of the total message another party is trying to communicate. The most effective way to accomplish this is through face-to-face interaction, where we can see the nonverbal expressions that give us clues to underlying emotional needs.
High acquaintance potential: Without the ability to accept and have positive regard for the other party, collaboration will not be possible. We have to like the person as a person and be willing to establish a relationship that goes beyond the issues of the dispute. This will allow the personal issues to be dealt with separately from the objective issues in the particular conflict so that we can explore options for mutual gain.
Constituency support: The parties in conflict will not be able to collaborate if outside constituencies try to force competitive and positional norms. Third parties must be supportive of the collaborative process or risk nullifying the positive steps taken toward collaboration by reneging on constructive agreements established between the two interacting parties. We must prevent or resolve any conflict with our constituencies prior to interacting with the other party in the primary dispute.
Cooperative tasks: Acceptance goes a long way toward diffusing head-to-head competition in conflict, but unless a joint or mutual task is established, there will be no need to collaborate. We at least must frame the conflict as a problem to be solved together in order to establish a collaborative environment.
Shared exploration: Sharing in the process of understanding the problem and creating solutions keeps both parties involved. This saves one party from the trap of inventing all of the solutions, and the inevitable dependence and resentment that accompanies that responsibility. When both parties are involved, there will be stronger commitment to the final solutions.
No fixed agenda: An agenda creates a positional interaction that is based on satisfying the needs of one party without understanding how the interests of both are related. Having an agenda sends the message that you are not interested in the other party's issues and needs issues and needs. The only agenda should be to follow the steps of collaboration and work toward mutual gain.
Adherence to collaborative process steps. Successful resolution requires that we follow the steps of collaboration. If we skip a step, we risk sending the other party mixed signals that will; propel that party toward a defensive, competitive mode.
The Six Steps of Collaboration
With the above conditions in mind, a constructive environment can be established. However, collaboration also requires that resolution proceed through a series of steps that create a more effective interaction. The steps progress logically &should be departed from only to return to a previous step as a means to enhance the relationship & increasing understanding. Skipping steps reduces the chance for collaborative agreement and should be avoided. The six steps are as follows:
The Six Steps of Collaboration
Prepare for the Interaction.
2. Initiate the Exchange.
3. Facilitate the Relationship.
4. Understand the Interests.
5. Examine the Solutions.
6. Reach Consensus

Continue Reading ...

Explain various types of conflicts.

Explain various types of conflicts. Discuss the strategies which have been used to resolve interparty conflict in any organization you are familiar with. Briefly describe the organization you are referring to.

Since individuals all comprise of different mind sets it’s quite possible that there may be arguments or differences of opinion regarding certain issues. You’ll find this happening most often in places of work. Usually there are different types of conflict but the ones causing most tensed environments are those pertaining to the office. This is so as most of our time is spent there. So where there are more people, and you spend more time, you are likely to engage in heaty arguments as well. It’s also due to the age factor at times. Thanks to our growing misunderstandings or generation gaps, you’ll find most elderly people getting inhibited by the younger generation. One of the reasons is because of the feeling of insecurity. Interdependence Conflicts. A person's job depends on someone else's co-operation, output or input. For example a sales-person is constantly late inputting the monthly sales figures which causes the accountant to be late with her reports.
Differences in Style. People's style for completing a job can differ. For example, one person may just want to get the work done quickly (task oriented), while another is more concerned about having it done a particular way e.g. artistic or by including other people in the project.
Differences in Background/Gender. Conflicts can arise between people because of differences in educational backgrounds, personal experiences, ethnic heritage, gender and political preferences.
Differences in Leadership. Leaders have different styles. Employees who change from one supervisor to another can become confused, for example one leader may be more open and inclusive whilst another may be more directive.
Differences in Personality. This type of conflict is often fueled by emotion and perceptions about somebody else's motives and character. For example a team leader jumps on someone for being late because she perceives the team member as being lazy and inconsiderate. The team member sees the team leader as out to get him.

Types of Conflict

By evaluating a conflict according to the five categories below -- relationship, data, interest, structural and value -- we can begin to determine the causes of a conflict and design resolution strategies that will have a higher probability of success.

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.

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."

Interest Conflicts

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.

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.

Value Conflicts

Value conflicts are caused by perceived or actual incompatible belief systems. Values are beliefs that people use to give meaning to their 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.

Explain the Importance of the communication in organizations. Discuss various communication channels used in an organization you are familiar with and their effectiveness. Briefly describe the organization you are referring to.
Importance of Communication in an Organization

Communication is one of the basic functions of management in any organization and its importance can hardly be overemphasized. It is a process of transmitting information, ideas, thoughts, opinions and plans between various parts of an organization. It is not possible to have human relations without communication. However, good and effective communication is required not only for good human relations but also for good and successful business. Communication is one of the basic functions of management in any organization and its importance can hardly be overemphasized. It is a process of transmitting information, ideas, thoughts, opinions and plans between various parts of an organization. It is not possible to have human relations without communication. However, good and effective communication is required not only for good human relations but also for good and successful business. Effective communication is required at various levels and for various aspects in an organization such as –
For manager – employee relations: Effective communication of information and decision is an essential component for management-employee relations. The manager cannot get the work done from employees unless they are communicated effectively of what he wants to be done? He should also be sure of some basic facts such as how to communicate and what results can be expected from that communication. Most of management problems arise because of lack of effective communication. Chances of misunderstanding and misrepresentation can be minimized with proper communication system.

For motivation and employee morale:

Communication is also a basic tool for motivation, which can improve morale of the employees in an organization. Inappropriate or faulty communication among employees or between manager and his subordinates is the major cause of conflict and low morale at work. Manager should clarify to employees about what is to be done, how well are they doing and what can be done for better performance to improve their motivation. He can prepare a written statement, clearly outlining the relationship between company objectives and personal objectives and integrating the interest of the two.
For increase productivity: With effective communication, you can maintain a good human relation in the organization and by encouraging ideas or suggestions from employees or workers and implementing them whenever possible, you can also increase production at low cost.
For employees: It is through the communication that employees submit their work reports, comments, grievances and suggestions to their seniors or management. Organization should have effective and speedy communication policy and procedures to avoid delays, misunderstandings, confusion or distortions of facts and to establish harmony among all the concerned people and departments.
Importance of written communication: Communication may be made through oral or written. In oral communication, listeners can make out what speakers is trying to say, but in written communication, text matter in the message is a reflection of your thinking. So, written communication or message should be clear, purposeful and concise with correct words, to avoid any misinterpretation of your message. Written communications provides a permanent record for future use and it also gives an opportunity to employees to put up their comments or suggestions in writing. With the increasing trend of globalization, the impact of globalization has lead to a fast changing environment the boundaries for business is diminishing day by day so is the movement of people between different countries and cultures. The requirements of multinational organizations like expansion plans in international market has continuingly increased the need to understand the cultural dimensions of different countries to achieve better results. Therefore the companies are required to understand a national culture’s impact on areas like communication in multicultural teams in different countries which has a high degree of effect on team performance. So our research question revolves around this topic as “How does culture influence communication in multi cultural teams”. This thesis makes an attempt to investigate the influence of national cultures on communication in project teams in China and India by focusing on construction industry based on a number of factors including Hofstede’s (1980) cultural dimensional framework. The researchers intend to explore the cultural factors having major impact on communication in multicultural project teams of both countries. Throughout our research and study, useful lessons on national cultures impact on communication can be drawn for multicultural project team in China and India. It can provide a better insight for the project teams to have concern for and understand why people from different countries and cultures react or respond to various situations in a different manner, giving high emphasis to communication process. To support our thesis a total of 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers in different companies from construction sector. An empirical qualitative research using semi-structured interviews was conducted from a total of 12 project team members from multinational companies in China and India based on their experiences on cultural influence on team communication when working in project teams. The research revealed that there are significant differences and similarities in communication styles of Chinese and Indian teams, and the differences are mostly attributed to have strong links with cultural aspects. Specially with increasing economical changes the traditional patterns of behavior in communication are changing with time. The results also addressed number of similarities; especially in both the countries, culture continues to dominate most aspects of communication. The major implication is that the knowledge of the cultural differences and similarities would facilitate better team performance. Therefore, by keeping in mind the importance as well as the impact of various national cultures and presenting each member with a better understanding and knowledge about social background of the team mates within the multicultural teams, arguments and conflicts arise due to misconception and pre-judgment can be reduced. Hence it will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the teams working in multicultural environment.

Continue Reading ...

Explain the process of conflict.

Explain the process of conflict. Discuss the impact of conflict on the performance of an organization you are working in or any organization you are acquainted with. Describe
the organization you are referring to.


Answer: Process of Conflict: Ken only described the conflict process on audio tapes. I don’t think I ever saw a description in print.
Sometimes you have addictions that work at cross purposes e.g.
1. You addictively demand to eat a whole raspberry pie covered in whipped cream.
2. You addictively demand to have a flat tummy.
1. You addictively demand to stay with your lover.
2. You addictively demand to leave your lover.
1. You addictively demand to get pregnant.
2. You addictively demand to avoid having children.
Often the two sides represents two different centers of consciousness. For example sensation and cornucopia may make you want to approach a handsome stranger, where security and power want to avoid being rejected.
Here is how to handle such a situation: Get a tape recorder and just talk for 15 minutes, explaining why you should take option 1. Get into your emotions, explaining how you would feel if you got what you wanted and how you would feel if you did not. If you have a particularly horrendous conflict, you made need more time. Take all the time you need. Then repeat arguing for option 2.
Usually no matter what you do, you can’t satisfy all your "requirements". However, if "everyone" has at least had a chance to speak, they know their concerns were at least considered in deciding the best option to take. Those voices will be more willing to go along with the final decision they may not like.
Conflicts are an inevitable part of our daily lives. They arise between individuals and teams in an organization, between companies, and with your customers and clients. Employees' inability to effectively deal with conflict in the workplace takes its toll. It results in an enormous loss of productivity and profit, and negative emotional impact to those directly and indirectly involved.
Every organization pays the price for mismanaged conflict. It saps the financial health of an organization, repels customers, and damages human resources. Can you identify the impact of conflict in your organization?




We can help you stop the financial bleeding and the destructive interactions among business associates caused by poorly managed workplace conflict. We specialize in conflict resolution processes and tools that help you turn conflict into capital.
Every organization has a strategy for handling conflict.
Look at what conflict costs your organization:
1. Wasted time
How much time do your managers spend dealing with conflict? How much time do individuals spend focusing on disagreements and dissatisfaction instead of using their time productively?
2. Reduced quality of decisions
Are your team members withholding information or not fully cooperating with others? What decisions are being made without full, accurate and timely information?
3. Loss of skilled employees
What is it costing you to replace employees and the knowledge they take with them when they leave?
4. Restructuring
Are you or your managers making changes to work allocation to accommodate employees who aren't getting along?
5. Sabotage/damage/theft
Are you experiencing theft or damage to your equipment and inventory? Are work processes being compromised?
6. Lowered job motivation
Are your good employees losing motivation and time when they constantly have to deal with difficult co-workers?
7. Lost work time
Are employees choosing to take "sick days" off because of their frustration with unresolved disputes and stress?
8. Health costs
Is conflict contributing to employees' susceptibility to illness and injuries? Is your company paying more for health insurance and paid time off because of the associated stress?
TAKING THE EXAMPLE OF INTERDEPARTMENTAL CONFLICT WE SEE ITS IMPACT or OUTCOME and its SOURCES :
Example: Interdepartmental conflict
The president of the company was at the end of his rope in dealing with two employees who seemed to constantly march to their own drummer. These two employees would go around their bosses and create problems in other departments. The managers lacked the skills to address the issues with these problem employees. By the time the President asked to discuss the situation with him, he wanted to fire all four of them!

A plan was developed to identify the work related needs of the President, the managers and the employees. It was clear what the President wanted! It was not so clear what the managers and employees wanted. One-on-one meetings with each person identified what each needed from the other. These needs were outlined to identify what each need would look like when it was satisfactorily achieved and what the resulting benefit would be to the person and the company. Once the initial needs were addressed and achieved, additional needs were identified. This process continued until the parties involved could conduct the process themselves and report the achievements up the chain of command.

Today, the President, one manager and the two lower level employees remain and are achieving or exceeding performance expectations. The other manager decided on his own he did not enjoy being a manager and obtained a new position as an individual contributor within the same industry.


Example: Domestic/International Airline Carrier - Interdepartmental Conflict
This domestic in-flight services department has the responsibility of planning and delivering in-flight meals. Meals must be reproducible, storable and must conform to space and weight specifications. They depend on vendors to provide this service in a timely manner. This requires phenomenal teamwork which unfortunately was not present a short while ago. Infact, three teams constantly blamed the other two for poor performance. You could cut the tension with a knife. Essential communications that needed to take place - weren't! Vendors were catching the fallout and the quality of their service dropped even further.

The management thought of giving all the teams’ leadership training. Employees from each team were selected to join together for three separate Pathways to Leadership programs. They discovered that they had been strongly focused on everything that wasn't working. With so much energy focused backwards, there was very little left to solve problems in a healthy productive way. They learned a combination of tools that would enable them to focus on solutions.
• They discovered one of the most effective tools for turning dissension into cooperation -- the Recipe for Partnership. The tool works masterfully because the answers (and solutions) are their answers, not management's.
• At a special meeting, the three managers asked the first question of the Recipe: "What are some of the successes these three teams have created over the last year?" At first, there was silence. Then they began to identify these successes.
• The second question was, "What are some of the qualities that generated those successes?" Again, the group listed an array of virtues they shared within the department that made possible those wins.
• Rather than telling the staff what managers wanted from these teams, they asked. "What is your vision for what you want to produce together, and the way you want to treat each other in the process?"
• To really anchor the buy-in for the vision they created, the managers asked, "When you achieve this vision, what will be the benefits to you, your team members, the department and the company?" Finally the teams were at such a point of cooperation, they could address the last question in earnest; And this guaranteed teamwork and a successful resolution.

"Even before the end of the first Leadership training, the turnaround was evident. Participants came to know members of other teams on an individual basis and the resentments quickly began to fall away. With their new leadership skills, team members literally discovered a 'technology for communicating' they could immediately put to work. Even before our second session, I could see a 180-degree shift in how team leaders treated their front line workers. Vendors who used to be a tremendous headache, responded beautifully to our new approach. Also, we were on the verge of losing one of our key people, but now the comment I hear is, 'There's no place I'd rather be working.' I have to say that the overall shift is quite amazing."

Continue Reading ...

What are the various types of conflict?

What are the various types of conflict? Analyze two instances of inter-departmental conflicts in your organization and discuss the sources and outcomes of those conflicts.

Answer.

Conflict is a natural disagreement resulting from individuals or groups that differ in attitudes, beliefs, values or needs. It can also originate from past rivalries and personality differences. Other causes of conflict include trying to negotiate before the timing is right or before needed information is available.

Following are different types of conflicts:
Intrapersonal Conflict. Intrapersonal conflict is internal to the individual (though its effects can profoundly influence organizational functioning) and is perhaps the most difficult form of conflict to analyze and manage. Intrapersonal conflict is basically a conflict between two incompatible tendencies. It arises when a stimulus evokes two different and incompatible tendencies and the individual is required to discriminate between these tendencies. In such a situation it is common for individuals to experience frustrations and to allow their conflict situation to be expressed in a range of behavioural strategies ranging from apathy and boredom to absenteeism, excessive drinking or destructive behaviour.

If such behavioural consequences are to be avoided, then it is essential to diagnose individual perception and utilize some techniques that would reduce anxiety-eliciting stimuli and increase consonance between individual behaviour and organizational requirements.

Interpersonal Conflict. Interpersonal conflict emphasizes the interaction of human factors in an organization. One can broadly suggest two classes of factors as conflict sources. These are:
1. Personal. Individuals are not identical, constant or consistent. When two individuals are brought together and kept together, each with his own qualities, needs and skills, a conflict may ensue if their attributes are not meshed together in a coordinated way. Interaction between individuals with different attitudes, values and needs can produce conflict behaviour and affect organizational performance.
2. Functional. Individuals in organizations have roles which are expected sets of behaviour associated with their position. In theory, individuals are not expected to engage in any discretionary behaviour. Such specification would be consistent with organizational preferences for consistency and predictability. In practice, however, role specifications tend to be ambiguous and incomplete, and in their interaction with others, some individuals often feel dissatisfied with their role or position, or they may feel that their aspirations for higher positions are being frustrated. Interpersonal conflict can be accounted for, to a great extent, in terms of the incumbents' roles and their expectations in particular situations.

Interdepartmental Conflict. The third major cause of organizational conflict is structural. Organizations are designed around product lines, regions or technical specialties. These activities are assigned to departments that often have mutually exclusive structured interests and goals and that interact within a framework of scarce resources and task dependence. When resources are relatively fixed and when one department's gain is at the expense of another, conflict should be expected. If two sub-units in an organizational system have differentiated goals and are functionally interdependent, conditions exist for conflict. Interdependence produces the need for collaboration, but it also presents occasions for conflict.

Other contextual factors which affect the interaction structure between departments and create the conditions for interdepartmental conflict include: different attitudes between line and staff units, organizational size (directly related to level of conflict) and standardization (inversely related to conflict), physical or communicational barriers between departments, unequal access to authority, rewards or organizational resources and ambiguity or uncertainty in assigning tasks or rewards to different departments.

These, then, are the sources of conflict situations in organizations. How a conflict situation will change over time, how its interrelated components will alter and the environment in which it occurs will respond, is dependent upon the administrator's efforts to manage or influence it. This, in turn, is related to one's understanding of the source of a specific conflict situation.

Example: Interdepartmental conflict
The president of the company was at the end of his rope in dealing with two employees who seemed to constantly march to their own drummer. These two employees would go around their bosses and create problems in other departments. The managers lacked the skills to address the issues with these problem employees. By the time the President asked to discuss the situation with him, he wanted to fire all four of them!

A plan was developed to identify the work related needs of the President, the managers and the employees. It was clear what the President wanted! It was not so clear what the managers and employees wanted. One-on-one meetings with each person identified what each needed from the other. These needs were outlined to identify what each need would look like when it was satisfactorily achieved and what the resulting benefit would be to the person and the company. Once the initial needs were addressed and achieved, additional needs were identified. This process continued until the parties involved could conduct the process themselves and report the achievements up the chain of command.

Today, the President, one manager and the two lower level employees remain and are achieving or exceeding performance expectations. The other manager decided on his own he did not enjoy being a manager and obtained a new position as an individual contributor within the same industry.


Example: Domestic/International Airline Carrier - Interdepartmental Conflict
This domestic in-flight services department has the responsibility of planning and delivering in-flight meals. Meals must be reproducible, storable and must conform to space and weight specifications. They depend on vendors to provide this service in a timely manner. This requires phenomenal teamwork which unfortunately was not present a short while ago. Infact, three teams constantly blamed the other two for poor performance. You could cut the tension with a knife. Essential communications that needed to take place - weren't! Vendors were catching the fallout and the quality of their service dropped even further.

The management thought of giving all the teams’ leadership training. Employees from each team were selected to join together for three separate Pathways to Leadership programs. They discovered that they had been strongly focused on everything that wasn't working. With so much energy focused backwards, there was very little left to solve problems in a healthy productive way. They learned a combination of tools that would enable them to focus on solutions.
q They discovered one of the most effective tools for turning dissension into cooperation -- the Recipe for Partnership. The tool works masterfully because the answers (and solutions) are their answers, not management's.
q At a special meeting, the three managers asked the first question of the Recipe: "What are some of the successes these three teams have created over the last year?" At first, there was silence. Then they began to identify these successes.
q The second question was, "What are some of the qualities that generated those successes?" Again, the group listed an array of virtues they shared within the department that made possible those wins.
q Rather than telling the staff what managers wanted from these teams, they asked. "What is your vision for what you want to produce together, and the way you want to treat each other in the process?"
q To really anchor the buy-in for the vision they created, the managers asked, "When you achieve this vision, what will be the benefits to you, your team members, the department and the company?" Finally the teams were at such a point of cooperation, they could address the last question in earnest; And this guaranteed teamwork and a successful resolution.

"Even before the end of the first Leadership training, the turnaround was evident. Participants came to know members of other teams on an individual basis and the resentments quickly began to fall away. With their new leadership skills, team members literally discovered a 'technology for communicating' they could immediately put to work. Even before our second session, I could see a 180-degree shift in how team leaders treated their front line workers. Vendors who used to be a tremendous headache, responded beautifully to our new approach. Also, we were on the verge of losing one of our key people, but now the comment I hear is, 'There's no place I'd rather be working.' I have to say that the overall shift is quite amazing."

Continue Reading ...

What is conflict, how does it take shape?

What is conflict, how does it take shape? Explain with suitable organizational examples as to what are the major sources of conflict and how do they impact the organizational functioning. Briefly discuss the ways of handling conflict. Briefly explain the organization, you are referring to.


Ans: Conflict is a theme that has occupied the thinking of man more than any other with the exception of God and love। Conflict has always been widespread in society but it is only recently that it has generated a lot of interest and has been the focus of research and studies. We are living in the age of conflict. Everyday the choices available to us regarding any decision are increasing in number.


Conflict is a part of organizational life and may occur within the individual between individuals group and between groups. While conflict is generally perceived as dysfunctional. Life is a never-ending process of one conflict after another. Remember the time when you were a small child and had to choose between a tricycle and a cricket set or say, a set of dolls and a new frock for a birthday present. That was probably your first exposure to a conflict situation. Of course, this is a simplistic example of a conflict, but has life been the same since? Probably not. Think bank and recall how each succeeding conflict in your life over the years has been increasingly complex.

Conflict is a theme that has occupied the thinking of man more than any other with the exception of God and love. Conflict has always been widespread in society but it is only recently that it has generated a lot of interest and has been the focus of research and study. We are living in the age of conflict. Everyday the choices available to us regarding any decision are increasing in number. You may have wanted to become a manager, an entrepreneur or a computer scientist. On the other hand, you father might have wanted you to become a doctor, a lawyer or a chartered accountant. Thus you faced a conflict not only at an interpersonal level, in terms of the various choices confronting you, but also at an interpersonal level-your choice vs. your father’s choice of a career for you.

Conflict is not confined at the individual level alone but is manifesting itself more and more in organisations. Employees have become more vociferous in their demands for a better deal. Various departments in an organisation face a situation full of conflicts due to a number of reasons like goal diversity, scarcity of resources or task interdependence etc. Management today is faced with the awesome responsibility of ensuring optimum levels of growth and productivity in an environment that is full of conflicting situations. A survey suggests that the modern manager spends over 20% of his time.

SOURCES OF CONFLICT:
A large number of potential sources of conflict exist in organizational life as antecedent conditions and realistic basis for some conflicts. Following are some such sources.

Competition for Limited Resources : Any group exists for the purpose of attaining some goals with the help of available resources. These resources may be tangible like men, materials, and money or intangible like power, status or the manager’s time. No organisation is capable of providing all the resources demanded by various units. Resources are limited and different groups have to compete for these scarce resources and many conflicts arise from this source.

Diversity of Goals Groups in organisation have different functions to perform and as such they develop their own norms and goals. Theoretically the achievement of these goals should achieve overall organizational goals but, often, in real life the reverse is true. Goals of one group are incompatible to the goals of another group. Take, for example, a company which manufactures electric fans that has a seasonal demand. Three departments marketing, production and finance-are involved. Since the demand for the product is seasonal, the marketing manager would like to have sufficient stock during the season. The production department has to gear up its capacity during the season but because of a tight labour market finds it difficult to hire labour temporarily and resorts to employ people on a permanent basis. This creates another problem. The finance manager says that as the storage costs are high it is expensive to keep stock build up in the slack season, and maintaining the production line during slack season imposes an additional burden.

This example shows that each department develops its own goals, which may conflict with another department’s goals and one department may try to achieve its goals at the expense of another. This happens quite often when the reward system is linked to group performance rather than to overall organisational performance.

Task Interdependence: Groups in an organisation do not function independent of one another. They have to interact with one another in order to accomplish their tasks. The sales department will have nothing to sell unless the production people produce goods and goods cannot be produced unless the financial department comes up with the money to buy raw materials.

Thus smooth interaction between various groups is essential for the efficient functioning of the organisation. Three types of interdependence can cause intergroup conflict-pooled, sequential and reciprocal. Pooled interdependence exists when two work groups may not directly interact with each other but are affected by each other’s actions. For example, when one independent product group performs poorly, all other groups may suffer financially. This can happen when rewards are contingent upon collective performance.

Sequential interdependence occurs when one group’s performance depends on another group’s prior performance. In a construction project, for example, the excavating team must prepare the foundation before the masons can work on the building structure. Since the masons depend on the excavators, conflict between the groups can occur when the excavator’s work is delayed.

Reciprocal interdependence occurs when two or more groups are mutually interdependent in accomplishing their tasks. For example, in developing and marketing a new product, three major departments (marketing, production and research) depend on each other to perform their tasks. Information possessed by one department is needed by another department. For example, the research department needs market information from the marketing department, and marketing needs research to provide customer services. When one group unable to meet the expectations of another group, intergroup conflict usually results.
Conflict can be managed in different ways, some focusing on interpersonal relationships and others on structural changes. Avoidance of the situation that causes the conflict is an example of an interpersonal approach.

Stimulating Productive Conflict
Most of us since childhood have been taught to avoid conflict and even disagreement how many times you have heard the statements “Don’t Argue”. “Stop fighting” or “It is better to turn the other cheek”? However, this tendency to avoid conflict is not always productive and there are times when there is a need to stimulate conflict. It is interesting experiment; series of groups were formed to tackle a problem. Some groups contained a planted member to challenge the majority opinion. Some groups didn’t have. Without fail, all groups that had a planted member came up with a main perceptive solution than the other groups. However when the groups were asked to drop a member. All groups that had a planted member chose to drop the dissenting member despite clear evidence that the conflict was beneficial. Such resistance to conflict is what mangers have to overcome in stimulating productive conflict.

Robbins (1978) suggested the following as signs where conflict stimulation is needed:

 The organization is filled with “yes men”.
 Employees are afraid to admit ignorance.
 Compromise is stressed in decision making.
 Managers put too much emphasis on harmony and peace.
 People are afraid to hurting the feelings of others.
 Popularity is given more importance than technical competence
 People show great resistance to change.
 New ideas are not forthcoming.

The presence of one or more of these signs is usually an indication of the need for conflict stimulation. Once the need has been identified you may adopt one or more of the following techniques:

(1) Manipulate Communication Channels
 Deviate messages from traditional channels
 Repress information
 Transmit too much information
 Transmit ambiguous or threatening information

(2) Alter the Organization’s Structure
(redefine jobs, alter tasks, reform units or activities).
 Increase a unit’s size
 Increase specialization or standardization
 Add, delete or transfer organizational members
 Increase interdependence between units

(3) Alter Personnel Behaviour Factors
 Change personality characteristics of leader
 Create role conflict
 Develop role incongruence

These are only a few of the suggestions possible. Depending upon your values and the organisation’s value-system, some of the suggestions may even sound undethical as you may feel that a desirable end-state does not always justify the questionable means (like transmitting threatening information). If stimulating your value-conflict, we become successful in helping you to understand the important option of conflict stimulation.

Resolving Interparty Conflict: How and when
You have seen that stimulating conflict is a required mode of conflict management when groups are characterized by apathy, complacency, non-responsiveness to needed change, lack of enthusiasm for generating alternatives, etc. Though these symptoms are very much present in a number of work-units in Indian organizations (and hence calls for appropriate conflict stimulation interventions), the more commonplace are heightened manifest conflicts. So, for most practical purposes, you should not only possess the knowledge of different strategies of conflict-resolution but should also know when to use which strategy.

There is no dearth of literature in this area and different authors have given different taxonomies in reviewing possible conflict resolution strategies. Here we consider Feldman’s (1985) strategies of intergroup conflict-resolution.

The primary dimension along which intergroup conflict-resolution strategies vary is how openly you as a manager should address the conflict. The chief characteristic of conflict-avoidance strategies is that they attempt to keep the conflict from coming into the open. The goal of conflict-defusion strategies is to keep the conflict in abeyance and to “cool” the emotions of the parties involved. Conflict-containment strategies allow some conflict to surface, but tightly control which issues are discussed and the manner in which they are discussed. Conflict-confrontation strategies are designed to uncover all the issues of the conflict and try to find a mutually satisfactory solution.

Conflict-avoidance Strategies are used in service organization

(i)Ignoring the Conflict: This strategy is represented by the absence of action. You, as a manager, have often avoided dealing with dysfunctional aspects of conflict. Unfortunately, when you avoid searching for the causes of the conflict, the situation usually continues or becomes worse over time. Although ignoring the conflict generally is ineffective for resolving important policy issues, there are some circumstances in which it is at least a reasonable way of dealing with problems. One such circumstance in which ignoring the conflict is a reasonable strategy is when the issue seems to be symptomatic of other, more basic conflicts. For example, two groups may experience conflict over the amount and quality of office space. Such conflicts often reflect more important issues about relative power and status. Resolving the office space problem would not address the key issues, and attention could be directed more fruitfully to the more basic concerns.

(ii) Imposing a Solution :This strategy consists of forcing the conflicting parties to accept a solution devised by higher-level manager. Imposing a solution does not allow much conflict to surface, nor does it leave room for the participants to air their grievances, so it also generally an ineffective conflict-resolution strategy. Any peace that it does achieve is likely to be short-lived. Because the underlying issues are not addressed, the conflict reappears in other guises and in other situations.

Forcing a solution can, however, be appropriate when quick, decisive action is needed. For instance, when there is conflict over investment decisions, and delays can be very costly, forcing a solution may be the best strategy available to top management. Likewise, it may be necessary when unpopular decisions must be made and there is very little chance that the parties involved could ever reach agreement (Thomas, 1977). An example of this is when an organization must cut back on the funding of programs. It is unreasonable to expect that any department would agree to cut its staff and expenses for the greater good, yet some hard unpleasant decisions ultimately must be made.

Conflict-defusion Strategies
(i) Smoothing : One way you can deal with conflict is to try to “smooth it over” by playing down its extent or importance. You may try to persuade the groups that they are not so far apart in their viewpoints as they think they are, point out the similarities in their positions, try to “pat” group members whose feelings have been hurt, or play down the importance of the issue. By smoothing the conflict, you can hope to decrease its intensity and avoid escalation or open hostility. Like forcing a solution, smoothing generally is ineffective because it does not address the key points of conflict.

However, smoothing sometimes can serve as a stopgap measure to let people cool down and regain perspective. In the heat of the battle, people may make statements that are likely to escalate the conflict, and smoothing often can bring the disagreement back to a manageable level. Smoothing also may be appropriate when the conflict concerns network issues. For instance, intergroup conflict frequently occurs between older and younger employees because of their different political beliefs and moral values. Smoothing can help to defuse the tension so that the conflict does not spill over into central work issues.

(ii) Appealing to Super ordinate Goals: You can defuse conflicts by focusing attention on the higher goals that the groups share or the long-range aims that they have in common. This tends to make the current problem seem insignificant beside the more important mutual goals.

Finding super ordinate goals the are important to both groups is not easy. Achieving these goals needs cooperation between the groups, so the rewards for achieving that super ordinate goal is organizational survival, i.e., if the subunits do not cooperate sufficiently, the continued existence of the larger organization itself will be severely jeopardized.

Conflict-containment Strategies
Using Representatives: One of the strategies you can use to contain conflict is the use of representatives. In order to decide an issue, you can meet with representatives of the opposing groups rather than deal with the groups in their entirety. The rationale is that the representatives know the problems and can argue the groups’ points of view accurately and forcefully.

Although this seems to be a logical way of proceeding, the research on the use of representatives as a means of solving intergroup conflict is fairly negative. Representatives are not entirely free to engage in compromise.

Continue Reading ...