Org Man Exam 2 Conflict and Negotiations Chapter 10

Arbitration

(3rd party negotiation) a process that involves bringing in a third party (the arbitrator) who has the authority to act as a judge and make a binding decision to which both parties must adhere. The decision made by the arbitrator is called an "Award" and is written/binding. This method of negotiation is commonly used to solve union-management issues

Arbitration-Mediation

(3rd party negotiation) an arbitrator hears both sides, makes a decision, and places it in a sealed envelope. Both parties then work thru mediation. If they cannot reach an agreement, the arbitrator's decision becomes binding. Leads to voluntary agreements 20% more often than mediation before arbitration

Intrapersonal Conflict

(Conflict types) conflict that arises within a person Comes from: - Role ambiguity: when you feel inadequate to complete a task or you do not understand what is expected/needed - Role conflict: two different job or task descriptions/requirements that seem mutually exclusive - Differences in roles: A manager may want to oversee an employee's work, believing that such oversight is a necessary part of the job. The employee, on the other hand, may consider such extensive oversight to be micromanagement or evidence of a lack of trust

Tips for Negotiation Success

Focus on agreement first Be patient Whose reality? Deadlines Be comfortable with silence

Conflict

a process that involves people disagreeing. Understanding how to treat it is the challenge; a common way it is mediated is through negotiation. Not all conflict is bad; in fact, there is an inverted U relationship between conflict (x axis) and performance (y axis) in organizations. A medium level of task-related conflict is often viewed as optimal, because it represents a situation in which a healthy debate of ideas takes place - conflict that is too low indicates employees do not care about their work (thus reducing performance), and conflict that is too high also reduces performance Positive conflict challenges to generate improvements Types: 1. Intrapersonal 2. Interpersonal 3. Intergroup

Alternative Dispute Resolution

a process by which two parties resolve conflicts through the use of a specially trained, neutral third party. Prevents escalation to a trial or hearing When all else fails

Negotiation

a process whereby two parties attempt to reach a solution/agreement. A common way that parties deal with conflict 5 Phases: 1. Investigation 2. Determine your BATNA 3. Presentation 4. Bargaining 5. Closure Strategies: 1. Distributive 2. Integrative

Causes of Conflict

organizational structure, limited resources, task interdependence, incompatible goals, personality differences, communication problems

Distributive Approach

(Negotiation Strategies) traditional fixed-pie approach in which negotiators see the situation as a pie that they have to divide between them. Each tries to get more of the pie and "win." Focusing on a fixed pie is a common mistake in negotiation, because this view limits the creative solutions possible. Ex: managers may compete over shares of a budget.

Investigation

(Negotiation process 1 ) Information gathering - What are your goals for negotiation? what do you hope to achieve from it? what are you willing to concede for it?

Determine your BATNA

(Negotiation process 2) Determine your best alternative to a negotiated agreement - this is an important indicator to how much power you have in a negotiation. If negotiations fail, what are your options? Ex: leave the company for another job offer, be a trophy spouse, etc When you know your opponent is desperate for a deal, you can demand much more. If it looks like they have a lot of other options outside the negotiation, you'll be more likely to make concessions.

Integrative Approach

(Negotiation strategies) an approach to negotiation in which both parties look for ways to integrate their goals under a large umbrella. That is, they look for ways to expand the pie, so that each party gets more through creative/collaborative problem solving. Also called a win-win approach. 1. Enter negotiation being cooperative rather than adversarial 2. Actively listen to the other side (this develops trust and mutual understanding of one another) 3. explore ways to achieve the individual goals The general idea is, "If we put our heads together, we can find a solution that addresses everybody's needs." Unfortunately, integrative outcomes are not the norm.

Personality Differences

(causes of conflict) People are different Understanding some fundamental differences among the way people think and act, we can better understand how others see the world. Knowing that these differences are natural and normal lets us anticipate and mitigate interpersonal conflict—it's often not about "you" but simply a different way of seeing and behaving. Ex: A relaxed person and a high strung person may butt heads when working together to meet a deadline

Limited Resources

(causes of conflict) Resources such as money, time, and equipment are often scarce. Competition among people or departments for limited resources is a frequent cause for conflict; everyone wants to perform well, nobody wants to get fired --> thus, people fight for resources How are resources distributed? ex: cutting-edge laptops and other devices are expensive resources that may be allocated to employees on a need-to-have basis in some companies. When a group of employees have access to such resources while others do not, conflict may arise among employees or between employees and management. While technical employees may feel that these devices are crucial to their productivity, employees with customer contact such as sales representatives may make the point that these devices are important for them to make a good impression to clients.

Communication Problems

(causes of conflict) Sometimes conflict arises simply out of a small, unintentional communication problem, such as lost emails or dealing with people who don't return phone calls. Giving feedback is also a case in which the best intentions can quickly escalate into a conflict situation. Provide information with integrity when communicating When communicating, focusing on behavior and its effects rather than the person is one strategy that may prevent well-intentioned feedback from creating conflict.

Incompatible Goals

(causes of conflict) Sometimes conflict arises when two parties think that their goals are mutually exclusive. Within an organization, these often arise because of the different ways department managers are compensated. Ex: a sales manager's bonus may be tied to how many sales are made for the company. As a result, the individual might be tempted to offer customers "freebies" such as expedited delivery in order to make the sale. In contrast, a transportation manager's compensation may be based on how much money the company saves on transit. In this case, the goal might be to eliminate expedited delivery because it adds expense. The two will butt heads until the company resolves the conflict by changing the compensation scheme.

Organizational Structure

(causes of conflict) conflict that is created by the setup of an organization For example, if a company uses a matrix structure as its organizational form, it will have decisional conflict built in, because the structure specifies that each manager report to two bosses.

Task Interdependence

(causes of conflict) when accomplishment of your goal requires reliance on others to perform their tasks ex: if you're tasked with creating advertising for your product, you're dependent on the creative team to design the words and layout, the photographer or videographer to create the visuals, the media buyer to purchase the advertising space, and so on. The completion of your goal (airing or publishing your ad) is dependent on others.

Competition

(conflict management - handling styles) A conflict handling style that is highly assertive and low in cooperation. These people want to reach their goal or get their solution adopted regardless of what others say or how they feel. "This is what I want, and I am going to fight for it" They are more interested in getting the outcome they want as opposed to keeping the other party happy, and they push for the deal they are interested in making. May lead to poor relationships with others if one is always seeking to maximize their own outcomes at the expense of others' well-being. This approach may be effective if one has strong moral objections to the alternatives or if the alternatives one is opposing are unethical or harmful.

Accomodation

(conflict management - handling styles) A cooperative and unasserative handling style. In this style, the person gives in to what the other side wants, even if it means giving up one's personal goals. "If it's important to you, I can go along with it" Can be effective if the issue doesn't matter to you, but if you use it to much, your opinions may be neglected High cooperation, low competitiveness

Collaboration

(conflict management - handling styles) High on assertiveness and cooperation. This is a strategy to use for achieving the best outcome from conflict—both sides argue for their position, supporting it with facts and rationale while listening attentively to the other side. The objective is to find a win-win solution to the problem in which both parties get what they want. They'll challenge points but not each other. They'll emphasize problem solving and integration of each other's goals. "Lets look at the bigger picture and find out how we can both get what we want" Generally considered the best style due to its wide range of situational applications

Avoidance

(conflict management - handling styles) Uncooperative and unasserative conflict handling style. In this style, people seek to avoid and completely deny the presence of conflict. "I don't think there's a problem. I feel fine about the way things are" may not be a significant problem if the issue at hand is trivial, it becomes a problem when individuals avoid confronting important issues low cooperation, low competitiveness

Compromise

(conflict management - handling styles) Middle ground conflict handling style in which a person has some desire to express their own concerns and get their way but still respects the other person's goals as well. "Maybe we can both agree to give a little" both sides sacrifice something Middle cooperation, middle competitiveness

Interpersonal Conflict

(conflict types) Conflict that arises between 2 or more people Comes from: - Personality: (or differences thereof) - Communication: Do you communicate with others? How do you communicate? How is your communication received by others?

Intergroup Conflict

(conflict types) Conflict that takes place among different groups. Types of groups may include different departments or divisions in a company, employee union and management, or competing companies that supply the same customers. in group bias (the tendency to favor the group to which one belongs) often makes this type of conflict worse

Presentation

(negotiation process 3 ) Assemble your information in a way that supports your position/side. Present facts surrounding your case; this phase generally receives the most attention ex: In a job hiring or salary negotiation situation, for instance, you can present facts that show what you've contributed to the organization in the past (or in a previous position), which in turn demonstrates your value. Perhaps you created a blog that brought attention to your company or got donations or funding for a charity. Perhaps you're a team player who brings out the best in a group.

Bargaining

(negotiation process 4) Parties discuss their goals and seek an agreement. A major part of this process is making concessions/compromise (giving up something to get something in return) One key to the success of this phase is to ask questions. Don't simply take a statement such as "we can't do that" at face value. Rather, try to find out why the party has that constraint. Establishing trust is essential to effective bargaining and negotiation outcomes such as the final joint outcome and outcome satisfaction for both parties. Thus, it makes sense to invest in establishing trust and developing it over time.

Closure

(negotiation process 5) last part of negotiation when you and the other party have either come to an agreement on the terms or one party has decided that the final offer is unacceptable and therefore must be walked away from. The savviest of negotiators see the rejection as an opportunity to learn. "What would it have taken for us to reach an agreement?" Asking questions as to why negotiation failed can reveal simple solutions that can change the outcome of that failed negotiation.

Mediation

(third party negotiation) An outside third party (the mediator) enters the situation with the goal of assisting the parties to reach an agreement. The mediator can facilitate, suggest, and recommend. The mediator works with both parties to reach a solution but does not represent either side. Rather, the mediator's role is to help the parties share feelings, air and verify facts, exchange perceptions, and work toward agreements. A mediator does not resolve the charge or impose a decision on the parties. Instead, the mediator helps the parties to agree on a mutually acceptable resolution. advantages of mediation: the mediator helps the parties design their own solutions, including resolving issues that are important to both parties, not just the ones under specific dispute. Interestingly, sometimes mediation solves a conflict even if no resolution is reached. It is time for mediation when: - The parties are unable to find a solution themselves. - Personal differences are standing in the way of a successful solution. - The parties have stopped talking with one another. - Obtaining a quick resolution is important.

Positive Outcomes of Conflict

Consideration of a broader range of ideas, resulting in a better, stronger idea Surfacing of assumptions that may be inaccurate Increased participation and creativity Clarification of individual views that build learning (in all parties involved; increased understanding of the other for future reference)

Common Mistakes in Negotiation

Failing to negotiate/accepting the first offer having unrealistic expectations letting your ego get in the way getting overly emotional letting past negative outcomes affect the present ones

Conflict Management

Resolving disagreements effectively Ways to manage conflict: - Change the structure: when structure is the cause of conflict, change it to resolve. If the conflict is at an intergroup level, such as between two departments, a structural solution could be to have those two departments report to the same executive, who could align their previously incompatible goals. - Change team composition: If the conflict is between team members, change the composition of the team, separating the personalities that were at odds. In instances in which conflict is attributed to the widely different styles, values, and preferences of a small number of members, replacing some of these members may resolve the problem. If that's not possible because everyone's skills are needed on the team and substitutes aren't available, consider a physical layout solution. - Create a common opposing force: Group conflict within an organization can be mitigated by focusing attention on a common enemy such as the competition. - Consider Majority Rule: only if participants believe the procedure is fair - Problem Solve - Consider the Role of Mood: create a positive mood environment Handling Styles: - Accomodation - Avoidance - Compromise - Collaboration -Competition

Negative Outcomes of Conflict

increased stress and anxiety among individuals, which can decrease productivity and satisfaction feelings of being defeated and demeaned, which lowers individuals morale and may increase turnover a climate of mistrust, which hinders the teamwork and cooperation necessary to get work done