Ch. 10: Conflict and Negotiation in the Workplace

Reduce Interdependence

- 3 ways 1. Create buffers: buffer is any mechanism that loosens the coupling between 2 or more ppl or work units > reduces potential for conflict bc buffer reduces effect of one party on the other 2. Use integrators: employees who coordinate the activities of multiple work units toward the completion of a shared task or project > integrators reduce amount of direct interaction required among diverse work units and rarely have direct authority over departments they integrate so they must rely on referent power and persuasion to manage conflict and accomplish the work 3. Combine jobs: form of job enrichment and way to reduce task interdependence

Structural Sources of Conflict in Organizations

- 6 main conditions that cause conflict in organizational settings: > Incompatible Goals > Differentiation > Interdependence > Scarce Resources > Ambiguous Rules Communication Problems

Structural Approaches to Conflict Management

- 6 structural approaches to minimize dysfunctional conflict: 1. Emphasize Superordinate Goals 2. Reduce Differentiation 3. Improve Communication and Mutual Understanding 4. Reduce Interdependence 5. Increase Resources 6. Clarify Rules and Procedures

Manage Concessions

- A concession is one party's revision of a negotiating position so it comes closer to the other party's current position - Successful negotiators make fewer concessions and each concession is smaller than those of average negotiators, particularly in distributive negotiations where both parties know bargaining zone - Form of communication bc they signal to the other party the relative importance of each issue being negotiated - Need to be clearly labeled and should be accompanied by an expectation that the other party will reciprocate - Best strategy is to be moderately tough and give just enough concessions to communicate sincerity and motivation to resolve conflict

Conflict Process Model

- Begins with sources of conflict, lead one or more parties to perceive that conflict exists, they become aware that one party's statements and actions interfere with or otherwise threaten their own goals or beliefs > these perceptions produce and interact with emotions experienced about the conflict - Conflict perceptions usually produce negative emotions but some experience positive emotions through cognitive reappraisal of the conflict - Manifest conflict represents each party's decisions and behaviors toward the other > conflict episodes range from subtle nonverbal communication to warlike aggression > influenced by how the other party perceives and reacts emotionally to them - Conflict process is a series of episodes that potentially cycle into conflict escalation > even if first party didn't intent to demonstrate conflict, second party's response may create that perception

Improve Communication and Mutual Understanding

- Change physical or reporting arrangements so employees across departments have more occasions to interact with one another - Intergroup mirroring: conflicting groups separately document their perceptions of how group perceives itself, how it perceives the other group, and how the group believes it's perceived by the other group > "mirroring" stage follows where each group discussion its 3 sets of perceptions with other group - 2 warnings: 1. Interventions should only be applied only for groups or individuals with moderate or low differentiation > if there's overwhelming differences, they tend to focus on information during the interaction that reinforces the view 2. Ppl in some cultures are less comfortable with practice of resolving differences through direct and open dialogue > threatens harmony and risks loss of face

The Meaning and Consequences of Conflict

- Conflict: the process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party - Conflict episodes occur bc of clashing work goals, divergent personal values and experiences, and a variety of other reasons - Conflict is ultimately based on perceptions > it exists whenever one party believes that another might obstruct its efforts, regardless of whether the other party actually has those intentions - Conflict also occurs within each of us (intrapersonal conflict) like when our behavior conflicts with our beliefs and values

Preparing to Negotiate

- Develop Goals and Understand Needs > Successful negotiators develop goals about what they want to achieve from the exchange and reflect on what needs they are trying to fulfill from those goals > Specific needs can be satisfied by different goals > Effective negotiators try to understand their own needs and avoid becoming locked into fixed goals > Focusing on needs enables negotiators to actively consider different proposals and opportunities > Negotiators engage in form of goal setting that identifies 3 key positions shown in bargaining zone model: 1. Initial offer point: each party's opening offer to the other side > If initial offer is set higher than other party expected, it can anchor the negotiation at a higher point along the range by reframing the other party's perception of what's considered a "high" or "low" settlement (high initial point can keep outcome closer to your target point, may cause other side to lower its resistance point) > Challenge is to avoid initial offer that's set so high that other party breaks off negotiations or damages trust that can't be rebuilt 2. Target point: realistic goal or expectation for final agreement > must consider alternative strategies to achieve those objectives and test underlying assumptions about the situation 3. Resistance point: point beyond which you will make no further concessions and walk away from negotiations > Best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA): the best outcome you might achieve through some other course of action if you abandon the current negotiation >> Having more than 1 BATNA increases your power

Distributive vs. Integrative Approaches to Negotiation

- Distributive: negotiator believes those involved in the conflict must distribute portions from a fixed pie > win-lose orientation > Most common when parties have only one item to resolve - Integrative or mutual gains: when negotiators believe the resources at stake are expandable rather than fixed if the parties work creatively together to find a solution > win-win orientation > Most commons when multiple issues are open for discussion - Negotiators begin with cautiously integrative approach to negotiations, but switch to a distributive approach when they realize that their interests are perfectly opposing

Is Conflict Good or Bad?

- Dominant view over most of this time is that conflict is dysfunctional > organizations work best through harmonious relations - "Conflict is bad" perspective is now considered too simplistic, but workplace conflict can have negative consequences under some circumstances - Conflict potentially threatens personal needs and self-concept which reduces job satisfaction and increases stress and turnover; undermines job performance by consuming otherwise productive time, distracting employees from their work and sapping their personal energy > Also undermines information sharing bc employees are less motivated to ask for, pay attention to, and transmit information with discordant coworkers > Disagreements can fuel organizational politics and waste resources > Conflict among team members may hurt team cohesion and performance - Benefits of Conflict > "Optimal conflict" perspective: organizations are most effective when employees experience a moderate level of conflict (organizations are less effective when intensity of conflict is very low or high) > Improves decision making by energizing people to debate issues and evaluate alternatives more thoroughly > when employees disagree, they probe and test one another's way of thinking to better understand the underlying issues that need to be addressed >> Conflict motivates creative thinking to discover novel solutions to the disagreement > Moderate levels of conflict maintain vigilance with the external environment > through disagreement, employees engage in active thinking > When team members experience conflict with external sources (competition with or threats from other teams or organizations) > ppl tend to be more motivated to work together when faced with an external threat, strengthening cohesion with the team

The Negotiation Setting

- Environment in which negotiations occur > location (easier to negotiate on your own turf) - Many negotiators agree to neutral territory - Physical distance between parties and formality of setting can influence how they perceive each other and the disputed issue - Many negotiators have audiences - anyone with vested interest in negotiation outcomes, like executives, other team members, or general public > negotiators act differently when their audience observes the negotiation or has detailed information about the process, compared to situations in which audience sees only end results

Reduce Differentiation

- For employees to have meaningful interaction with ppl in other groups, like through participation in multidisciplinary projects - Rotate staff to different departments or regions throughout their career - Leaders to build and maintain a strong organizational culture

Gather Information

- Helps you discover the other party's needs hidden behind their stated offers and negotiation goals - Can potentially transform distributive negotiations into integrative negotiations by discovering multiple dimensions that weren't previously considered - Information is important in integrative negotiations bc the parties require knowledge of each other's needs to discover solutions that maximize benefits for both sides - Skilled negotiators draw out more details by presenting open-ended questions followed by probe questions ("Oh why is that?"); also test how well they understand the other's sides facts and position by summarize the information presented and by asking for clarification on specific points; communicate inner thoughts and feelings which encourages other party to provide further information that will help dissolve concerns

Choosing the Best Third-Party Intervention Strategy

- Managers usually adopt an inquisitional approach whereby they dominate the intervention process as well as make a binding decision > prefer this because it gives them control over the conflict process and outcome and tends to resolve disputes efficiently - Inquisition is least effective third-party conflict resolution method > Leaders who take inquisitorial role tend to collect limited information about the problem so their imposed decision may product ineffective solution to the conflict > Employees view inquisitional procedures and outcomes as unfair because they have little control over this approach - Third-party intervention depends on the situation, like type of dispute, the relationship between the manager and employees, and cultural values - Any third-party approach has more favorable results when it applies the procedural and interactional justice rules - For everyday disagreements the mediation approach is usually best - When employees cannot resolve their differences through mediation, arbitration seems to work best because the predetermined rules of evidence and other processes create a higher sense of procedural justice > arbitration also preferred where the organization's goals should take priority over individual goals

Interpersonal Conflict-Handling Styles

- Mary Parker Follett observed that ppl use a variety of interpersonal conflict-handling styles to address conflict situations > 5-category model which recognizes that how ppl respond behaviorally to a conflict situation depends on the relative importance they place on maximizing outcomes for themselves and for the other party 1. Problem solving 2. Forcing 3. Avoiding 4. Yielding 5. Compromising

The Negotiation Process

- Most important specific negotiation practices are to gather information, manage concessions, manage time, and build the relationship - Gather Information - Manage Concessions - Manage Time - Build the Relationship - The Negotiation Setting

Resolving Conflict through Negotiation

- Negotiation: the process in which interdependent parties with divergent beliefs or goals attempt to reach agreement on issues that mutually affect them - People negotiate when they need to work together (mutual dependence), need to reach a consensus on decisions that affect them and initially don't have identical preferences regarding those decisions

Manage Time

- Negotiators make more concessions as deadline gets closer > negotiators with ore power in relationship sometimes apply time pressure through an "exploding offer" whereby they give the opponent a very short time to accept their offer > produces time pressure which can motivate the other party to accept the offer and forfeit the opportunity to explore their BATNA - More time ppl have invested, more committed they become to ensuring an agreement is reached > increases tendency to make unwarranted concessions so that negotiations don't fail

Cultural and Gender Differences in Conflict-Handling Styles

- Preferred conflict handling styles varies from one culture to another - Ppl from high collectivist cultures are motivated to maintain harmonious relations and more likely than those from less collectivist cultures to manage disagreements through avoidance or problem solving - Men and women also rely on different styles > men are more likely than women to use forcing style and women are more likely to use avoiding style, problem solving, compromising, yielding (women pay more attention to relationship between parties so preferred style is to protect the relationship)

Emphasize Superordinate Goals

- Superordinate goals: goals that the conflicting parties value and whose attainment requires the joint resources and effort of those parties - Higher order aspirations rather than work unit operational goals or individual key performance objectives - Most effective executive teams frame their decisions as superordinate goals that rise above each executive's departmental or divisional goals - Effective leaders reduce dysfunctional organizational conflict through an inspiration vision that unifies employees and makes them less preoccupied with their superordinate goal differences - By increasing commitment to companywide goals, engineering and marketing employees pay less attention to their competing departmental-level goals, which reduces perceived conflict with each other

Minimizing Relationship Conflict during Task Conflict

- The stronger the level of debate and the more the issue is tied to our self-view, the more likely the task conflict will evolve into (or mix with) relationship conflict - 3 conditions can minimize the level of relationship conflict during task conflict episodes: 1. Emotional intelligence: relationship conflict is less likely to occur or escalate when team members have high levels of emotional intelligence, as well as related attributes of emotional stability and trait self-control > Employees can better understand and regulate their own emotions, reducing risk of escalating perceptions of interpersonal hostility and more likely to view coworker's emotional reaction as valuable information rather than personal attack 2. Team development: plays critical role in suppressing relationship conflict during task conflict > As teams develop, members become better at understanding and anticipating one another, reducing risk that a coworker's words or actions will be misinterpreted as a conflict trigger > Team development produces higher team cohesion in which employees feel strong social identity with group > members motivated to minimize relationship conflict bc these episodes threaten team's stability and member's future with that group 3. Norms supporting psychological safety > Psychological safety: a shared belief that it's safe to engage in interpersonal risk-taking; specifically that presenting unusual ideas, constructively disagreeing with the majority, and experimenting with new work behaviors will not result in coworkers posing a threat to their self-concept, status, or career > Employees are confident that presenting unusual ideas, constructively disagreeing with the majority or experimenting with new work behaviors will not cause coworkers to threaten their self-concept, status, or career > Psychological safety flourishes when team and organizational norms encourage employees to respect and value one another, demonstrate interest in one another, be open minded about and tolerant with coworkers' opinions, and show positive intentions toward one another

Build the Relationship

- Trust keeps parties focused on issue rather than personalities, motivates them to return to bargaining table when negotiations stall, and encourages parties to engage in future negotiations - Build trust by discovering common backgrounds and interests with other party, keeping promises in negotiation and identifying shared goals and values with other party - Relationship building demands emotional intelligence

Choosing the Best Conflict-Handling Style

- You gravitate toward one or two conflict-handling styles that match your personality, personal and cultural values, and past experience - Best style depends on the situation - Problem solving is preferred style whenever possible but not best in all situations o Can be stressful and difficult when ppl experience strong feelings of conflict (negative emotions undermine trust in the other party) - Forcing style is inappropriate bc high level of assertiveness tends to generate relationship conflict more quickly or intensely than occurs with other conflict handling styles - Avoiding is often ineffective bc it produces uncertainty and frustration rather than resolution of the conflict - Yielding is appropriate when other party has substantially more power, issue isn't as important to you as to other party, and you aren't confident that your position has superior logical or ethical justification - Compromising may be best where conflict is simple and perfectly opposing

Task Conflict

a type of conflict in which people focus their discussion around the issue ("task") in which different viewpoints occur while showing respect for people involved in that disagreement - Keeps the spotlight on the qualities of the ideas presented - Participants examine behavior, ideas, and recommendations in terms of their factual accuracy, logic, and reasonable inferences - Avoids any attention to the competence or power of the people involved - Tends to produce beneficial outcomes, particularly better decision making - Almost all workplace conflicts can be framed as task conflicts, even when some participants try to pin the problem on flaws on the other party's personal characteristics

Relationship Conflict

a type of conflict in which people focus their discussion on qualities of the people in the dispute, rather than on the qualities of the ideas presented regarding a task-related issue - When one party attacks another party's behavior or ideas by questioning the competence of those opponents - Dismisses ideas by arguing that it was proposed or supported by ppl who lack the ability, motivation, wisdom, thoughtfulness, and other virtuous characteristics to think of useful suggestions - Occurs more indirectly when ppl rely on status or expertise to defend their position - Occurs when someone is abrasive or assertive to the extent that the behavior demeans others in the conversation - Dysfunctional because it threatens the other party's self-esteem > triggers defense mechanisms and a competitive orientation between the opponents - Reduces mutual trust by emphasizing interpersonal differences > weakens any bond that might exist - Escalates more quickly than task conflict bc adversaries become less motivated to communicate and share information > makes it more difficult to resolve conflict and rely on distorted perceptions and stereotypes which reinforces perceptions of threat

Compromising

actively seeking a middle ground between the interests of the 2 parties > calculating losses from concessions with equally valued gains or trying to achieve similar levels of how much value each party sacrifices to reach agreement

Third-Party Conflict Resolution

any attempt by a relatively neutral person to help conflicting parties resolve their differences - 3 main 3rd party dispute resolution activities: 1. Arbitration: arbitrators have high control over the final decision but low control over the process > Executives engage in this by following previously agreed rules of due process, listening to arguments from disputing employees, and making a binding decision 2. Inquisition: inquisitors control all discussion about conflict > High decision control bc it involves choosing the form of conflict resolution; high process control bc inquisitors choose which information to examine and how to examine it, and decide how conflict resolution process will be handled 3. Mediation: mediators have high control over the intervention process; main purpose is to manage process and context of interaction between disputing parties but conflicting parties make the final decision about how to resolve their differences > Mediators have little or no control over conflict resolution decision

Clarify Rules and Procedures

conflict arises from ambiguous rules

Differentiation

differences among ppl and work units regarding their beliefs, values, experiences, and preferences - 2 ppl or departments may agree on a common goal but have different beliefs about how to best achieve that goal - Caused by childhood, socialization, gender, ethnicity, occupation, personal values, personality, different age groups (different needs, expectations, behaviors), corporate mergers and acquisitions

Scarce Resources

each person or department requiring the same resource interferes with others who also need that resource to fulfill their goals - More resources one group receives, the fewer resources other groups will receive

Yielding

giving in completely to the other side's wishes or at least cooperating with little or no attention to your own interests > making unilateral concessions and unconditional promises

Incompatible Goals

occurs when goals of one person or department seem to interfere with another person's or department's goals

Increase Resources

resource scarcity is source of conflict so increasing amount of resources available would have opposite effect

Problem Solving

tries to find a solution that's beneficial for both parties - Win-win orientation: the belief that conflicting parties will find a mutually beneficial solution to their disagreement - Information sharing is important feature bc both parties collaborate to identify common ground and potential solutions that satisfy everyone involved

Avoiding

tries to smooth over or evade conflict situations altogether - Steer clear of coworkers associated with the conflict, minimize discussion of the sensitive topic when interacting with the other person - May have low-low concern in short run due to circumstances, but have high concern about one or both party's interests in the long run

Forcing

tries to win the conflict at the other's expense - Win-lose orientation: the belief that conflicting parties are drawing from a fixed pie, so the more one party receives, the less the other party will receive - Relies on "hard" influence tactics to get one's own way - No aggressiveness or bullying > includes moderate degrees of assertiveness

Ambiguous Rules

uncertainty increases the risk that one party will interfere with the other party's goals - Encourages political tactics and sometimes employees enter a free for all battle to win decisions in their favor - When clear rules exist, employees know what to expect from one another and usually agree to abide by those rules

Communication Problems

when employees lack ability or motivation to state their disagreement in a diplomatic, nonconfrontational manner - Stronger emotive language and other signals, the stronger the perception by receivers that the conflict not only exists, but is a high risk threat > receivers often reciprocate with similar response which further escalates the conflict - Poorly crafted communication is a source of conflict, but lack of communication often amplifies that conflict > parties actively avoid each other - Differentiation creates more positive and re-assuring self-concept and a more negative image of the opponent

Interdependence

when employees must share resources or coordinate work activities to perform their jobs - Conflict is lowest when working with others in a pooled interdependence relationship and potential for conflict is higher in sequential interdependence work relationships (assembly line) - Highest risk and intensity of conflict occurs in reciprocal interdependence situations bc employees in these situations quickly and significantly affect each other