Chapter 13

Conciliation

A neutral third party informally acts as a communication conduit between disputing parties.

Stimulating Functional Conflict

Devil's advocacy Dialectic Method

Stronger Relationships

Good agreements enable conflicting parties to build bridges of goodwill and trust for future use. Moreover, conflicting parties who trust each other are more likely to keep their end of the bargain.

Ways to solve cross cultural conflict

Good listening skills topped the list, followed by sensitivity to others and cooperativeness rather than competitiveness.

FIve Conflict Handling Styles

High to low concern for self is found on the horizontal axis of the grid while low to high concern for others forms the vertical axis. Various combinations of these variables produce the five different conflict-handling styles: integrating, obliging, dominating, avoiding, and compromising

Functional Conflict

Serves organization's interests Also called constructive conflict

Ombudsman

Someone who works for the organization, and is widely respected and trusted by his or her coworkers, hears grievances on a confidential basis and attempts to arrange a solution.

Devils Advocacy

assigning someone the role of critic

Dialectic Method

calls for managers to foster a structured debate of opposing viewpoints prior to making a decision

Intergroup conflict

conflict among work groups, teams, and departments Too much cohesiveness can breed groupthink because a desire to get along pushes aside critical thinking

Compromising

give-and-take approach involves moderate concern for both self and others Appropriate when parties have opposite goals

Negotiating

give-and-take decision-making process involving interdependent parties with different preferences

Personality conflict

interpersonal opposition driven by personal dislike or disagreement.

Avoiding

involves either passive withdrawal from the problem or active suppression of the issue Appropriate for trivial issues or when the costs of confrontation outweigh the benefits of resolving the conflict

Conflict Triangle

occurs when two people are having a problem and, instead of addressing the problem directly with each other, one of them gets a third person involved

Conflict

process in which one party perceives its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party

Dominating (Forcing)

relies on formal authority to force compliance Appropriate when an unpopular solution must be implemented

Contact hypothesis

the more the members of different groups interact, the less intergroup conflict they will experience

Dysfunctional Conflict

threatens organization's interests.

Distributive Negotiation

usually involves a single issue—a "fixed-pie"—in which one person gains at the expense of the other

Mediation

"The mediator—a trained, third-party neutral—actively guides the disputing parties in exploring innovative solutions to the conflict.

Peer Review

A panel of trustworthy coworkers, selected for their ability to remain objective, hears both sides of a dispute in an informal and confidential meeting.

Intergroup conflict increases

A single personality conflict, for instance, may contaminate the entire intergroup experience. The same goes for an employee who voices negative opinions or spreads negative rumors about another group.

Facilitation

A third party, usually a manager, informally urges disputing parties to deal directly with each other in a positive and constructive manner.

Desired Conflict Outcomes

Agreement, Stronger Relationships, Learning.

Integrative Negotiation

An agreement can be found that is better for both parties than what they would have reached through distributive negotiation. This is an integrative negotiation.

Agreement.

But at what cost? Equitable and fair agreements are best. An agreement that leaves one party feeling exploited or defeated will tend to breed resentment and subsequent conflict.

Techniques for Stimulating Functional Conflict

Devils Advocacy steps 2, 3, 4 differ from Dialectic Decision method. Step 2: Devils advocate is assigned to criticize proposal. Dialectic: assumptions underlying proposal are identified. Step 3: critique is presented to key decision makers. Dialectic: conflicting counterproposal is generated based on different assumptions. Step 4: Devils advocacy: additional information relevant to issues is gathered. Dialectic: advocates of each position present and debate the merits of their proposals before key decision makers.

Arbitration

Disputing parties agree ahead of time to accept the decision of a neutral arbitrator in a formal court-like setting, often complete with evidence and witnesses.

Alternative Dispute Resolutions

Facilitation Conciliation Peer review Ombudsman Mediation Arbitration

Learning.

Functional conflict can promote greater self-awareness and creative problem solving. Like the practice of management itself, successful conflict handling is learned primarily by doing. Knowledge of the concepts and techniques in this chapter is a necessary first step, but there is no substitute for hands-on practice.

Antecedents of Conflict

Incompatible personalities or value systems. Overlapping or unclear job boundaries. Competition for limited resources. Inadequate communication. Unreasonable or unclear policies, standards, or rules. Unreasonable deadlines or extreme time pressure. Collective decision making

Third Party Interventions

The intent of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), according to a pair of Canadian labor lawyers, is that it "uses faster, more user-friendly methods of dispute resolution, instead of traditional, adversarial approaches avoiding costly lawsuits by resolving conflicts informally or through mediation or arbitration

Lessons of Handling Intergroup Conflict

The top priority for managers faced with intergroup conflict is to identify and root out specific negative linkages between (or among) groups. A single personality conflict may contaminate the entire intergroup experience. The same goes for an employee who voices negative opinions or spreads negative rumors about another group.

Actions for intergroup conflict

Work to eliminate specific negative interactions between groups. Encourage personal friendships. FOSTER positive attitudes.

Why People Avoid Conflict

harm, rejection, loss of relationship, anger, being seen as selfish, saying the wrong thing, failing, hurting someone else, getting what you want, and intimacy.

Added Value Negotiation

hinges to a large extent on the quality of information exchanged, as researchers have documented. Telling lies, hiding key facts, and engaging in the other potentially unethical tactics listed in Table 13-3 erode trust and goodwill, both vital in win-win negotiations

Integrating

interested parties confront the issue and cooperatively identify the problem, generate and weigh alternative solutions, and select a solution Appropriate for complex issues plagued by misunderstanding

Obliging (Smoothing)

involves playing down differences while emphasizing commonalities Appropriate when it is possible to get something in return