9-1

CHATcn 9: CHATcn 9:
CoNrLicT ANo CoNrLicT ANo
NccoTiATioN NccoTiATioN
OncANizATioNAL OncANizATioNAL
cHAvioun cHAvioun
S
TH
CANAoiAN EoiTioN
LANcToN / HoaaiNs / Juocc
CoYnicHT PcAnsoN EoucATioN
CANAoA
9-2
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Chapter OutIine
W ConIlict DeIined
W ConIlict Resolution
W ConIlict Outcomes
W egotiation
W ndividual DiIIerences in egotiation
9-3
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
ConfIict and Negotiation
1. What is conIlict?
2. How can conIlict be resolved?
3. What are the eIIects oI conIlict?
4. How does one negotiate eIIectively?
5. What are some oI the contemporary issues
in negotiation?
9-4
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
ConfIict Defined
W process that begins when one party perceives
that another party has negatively aIIected, or is
about to negatively aIIect, something that the Iirst
party cares about.
Functional
W $upports the goals oI the group and improves its perIormance.
Dysfunctional
W Hinders group perIormance.
9-5
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
#esearch Findings
W ognitive
ConIlict related to diIIerences in perspectives and
iudgments.
W %ask-oriented
W Results in identiIying diIIerences
W &sually Iunctional conIlict
W Affective
Emotional conIlict aimed at a person rather than an
issue.
W DysIunctional conIlict
9-6
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
$ources of ConfIict
W ommunication
W Structure:
$ize, specialization, and composition oI the group
mbiguity responsibility
Zero-sum reward systems
Leadership style
%he diversity oI goals
I one group is dependent on another
9-7
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-1
ConfIict Intensity Continuum
AnnihiIatory
confIict
No
confIict
Overt efforts to destroy
the other party
Aggressive physicaI attacks
Threats and uItimatums
Assertive verbaI attacks
Overt questioning or
chaIIenging of others
Minor disagreements or
misunderstandings
$ources. ased on $. P. Robbins, anaging Organizational Conflict. A Nontraditional Approach (&pper $addle River, J: Prentice
Hall, 1974), pp. 93-97; and . Glasl, '%he Process oI ConIlict Escalation and the Roles oI %hird Parties, in Conflict anagement and
Industrial Relations, ed. G. . J. omers and R. Peterson (oston: Kluwer-iihoII, 1982), pp. 119-140).
9-8
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
ConfIict #esoIution: Two Dimensions
W ooperativeness
%he degree to which one party attempts to
satisIy the other party`s concerns.
W Assertiveness
%he degree to which one party attempts to
satisIy his or her own concerns.
9-9
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
ConfIict #esoIution: ConfIict-
HandIing $trategies
W Forcing
W mposing one`s will on the other party.
W Problem solving
W %rying to reach an agreement that satisIies both one`s own and
the other party`s aspirations as much as possible.
W Avoiding
W %he desire to withdraw Irom or suppress a conIlict.
W Yielding
W ccepting and incorporating the will oI the other party.
W ompromising
W situation in which each party to a conIlict is willing to give
up something.
9-10
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-2 ConfIict-HandIing $trategies
and Accompanying Behaviour
Uncooperative Cooperative
COOPERATVENESS
Trying to satisfy the other person's concerns
Forcing
Satisfying one's own interests
without concern for the other's
interests
Make threats and bluffs
Make persuasive arguments
Make positional commitments
Problem solving
Clarifying differences to find
mutually beneficial outcomes
Exchange information about
priorities and preferences
Show insights
Make trade-offs between
important and unimportant issues
Compromising r
Giving up something to reach an
outcome (done by both parties)
Match other's concessions
Make conditional promises
and threats
Search for a middle ground
Avoiding
Withdrawing from or ignoring
conflict
Don't think about the issues
Yielding
Placing the other's interests above
one's own
Make unilateral concessions
Make unconditional promises
Offer help
A
S
S
E
R
T

V
E
N
E
S
S
T
r
y
i
n
g

t
o

s
a
t
i
s
f
y

o
n
e
'
s

o
w
n

c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
'
U
n
a
s
s
e
r
t
i
v
e
A
s
s
e
r
t
i
v
e
$ources. ased on K. W. %homas,
'ConIlict and egotiation Processes in
Organizations, in Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational
Psvchologv, vol. 3, 2
nd
ed., ed. M. D.
Dunnette and L. M. Hough (Palo lto,
C: Consulting Psychologists Press,
1992), p. 668; C. K. W. De Dreu, .
Evers, . eersma, E. $. Kluwer, and
. auta, ' %heory-ased Measure oI
ConIlict Management $trategies in the
Workplace, Journal of Organizational
Behavior 22, no. 6 ($eptember 2001),
pp. 645-668; and D. G. Pruitt and J.
Rubin, $ocial Conflict. Escalation.
$talemate and $ettlement (ew York:
Random House, 1986).
9-11
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hat Can IndividuaIs Do to Manage
ConfIict?
W Problem solving
W Developing super-ordinate goals
W $moothing
W Compromising
W voidance
9-12
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Techniques for Managing ork-
#eIated ConfIicts
W Expansion oI resources
W uthoritative command
W ltering the human variable
W ltering the structural variables
9-13
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Factors That Lead to
PersonaIity ConfIicts
W Misunderstandings based on age, race, or cultural
diIIerences
W ntolerance, preiudice, discrimination, and bigotry
W Perceived inequalities
W Misunderstandings, rumours, or Ialsehoods about an
individual or group
W laming Ior mistakes or mishaps (Iinger-pointing)
9-14
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Tips for mpIoyees Having a
PersonaIity ConfIict
W Communicate directly with the other person to
resolve the perceived conIlict.
W void dragging co-workers into the conIlict.
W I necessary, seek help Irom direct supervisors or
human resource specialists.
$ource. R. Kreitner and . Kinicki, Organizational Behavior, 6
th
ed. (ew York: McGraw-Hill, 2004), p. 492, %able 14-1. Reprinted by permission oI McGraw-Hill Education.
9-15
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Tips for Third-Party Observers of a
PersonaIity ConfIict
W Do not take sides.
W $uggest the parties work things out themselves.
W I necessary, reIer the problem to parties` direct
supervisors.
$ource. R. Kreitner and . Kinicki, Organizational Behavior, 6
th
ed. (ew York: McGraw-Hill, 2004), p. 492, %able 14-1. Reprinted by permission oI McGraw-Hill Education.
9-16
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Tips hen Manager's mpIoyees
Are Having a PersonaIity ConfIict
W nvestigate and document conIlict.
W I appropriate, take corrective action (e.g.,
Ieedback or behaviour shaping).
W I necessary, attempt inIormal dispute resolution.
W ReIer diIIicult conIlicts to human resource
specialists or hired counsellors.
$ource. R. Kreitner and . Kinicki, Organizational Behavior, 6
th
ed. (ew York: McGraw-Hill, 2004), p. 492, %able 14-1. Reprinted by permission oI McGraw-Hill Education.
9-17
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-3 $trategies For DeaIing
ith IntercuIturaI ConfIict
9-18
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
#esoIving IntercuIturaI ConfIicts
W %hose Irom sian cultures show a preIerence Ior conIlict
avoidance, compared with mericans and ritons.
W Chinese and East sian managers preIer compromising as a
strategy, contrary to orth mericans.
W orth mericans preIer a problem-solving approach to conIlicts,
which yields a win-win solution.
W Win-win solutions are less likely to be achieved in sian cultures.
W East sian managers tend to ignore conIlict rather than make it
public.
W Japanese managers tend to choose non-conIrontational styles.
W Westerners are more likely to choose Iorcing as a strategy than
sians.
W orth mericans expect that negotiations may lead to a legal
contract; sian cultures rely less on legal contracts and more on
relational contracts.
9-19
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Third-Party ConfIict #esoIution
W acilitation
W Conciliation
W Ombudsperson
W Peer Review
W Mediation
W rbitration
9-20
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Third-Party ConfIict #esoIution
W Facilitator
Generally acquainted with both parties, working with
both sides to reach an agreement.
W onciliator
%rusted third party who provides an inIormal
communication link between the negotiator and the
opponent.
W nIormal link
W &sed extensively in international, labour, Iamily, and
community disputes
W act-Iind, interpret messages, persuade disputants to develop
agreements
9-21
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Third-Party ConfIict #esoIution
W mbudsperson
n impartial party, widely respected, and
trusted.
W Peer Review
panel oI peers who have been put together to
hear both sides oI the issue Irom the parties
involved and to recommend a solution.
9-22
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Third-Party ConfIict #esoIution
W ediator
a neutral third party who Iacilitates a negotiated solution by
using reasoning, persuasion, and suggestions Ior alternatives.
W Labour-management negotiations and civil court disputes
W $ettlement rate is about 60 percent; satisIaction rate is about 75
percent
W Participants must be motivated to bargain and settle
W est under moderate levels oI conIlict
W Mediator must appear neutral and non-coercive
W Arbitrator: has authority to dictate an agreement.
Voluntary (requested) or compulsory (imposed by law or contract)
lways results in a settlement
May result in Iurther conIlict
9-23
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-4 ConfIict and Unit
Performance
9-24
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
ConfIict Outcomes
%hree desired outcomes oI conIlict
1. Agreement: equitable and Iair agreements are the best
outcomes
2. Stronger relationships: when conIlict is resolved
positively, this can lead to better relationships and
greater trust.
3. Learning: handling conIlict successIully teaches one
how to do it better next time.
9-25
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Negotiation
W process in which two or more parties exchange
goods or services and attempt to agree upon the
exchange rate Ior them.
Distributive bargaining
W egotiation that seeks to divide up a Iixed amount oI
resources; a win-lose situation.
Integrative bargaining
W egotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create
a win-win solution.
9-26
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
How to Negotiate
W ive steps to negotiation:
Developing a strategy
DeIinition oI ground rules
ClariIication and iustiIication
argaining and problem solving
Closure and implementation
W dentiIy %:
Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement.
9-27
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-6 The Negotiation Process
DeveIoping a strategy
Defining ground ruIes
CIarification and Justification
Bargaining and ProbIem $oIving
CIosure and ImpIementation
$ource. %his model is based on R. J.
Lewicki, 'argaining and egotiation,
Exchange. The Organizational
BehaviorTeaching Journal 6, no. 2
(1981), pp. 39-40.
9-28
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-7 $taking Out the
Bargaining Zone
Buyer's aspiration range
$eIIer's aspiration range
Bargaining
Zone
Buyer's
target
point
$eIIer's
resistance
point
Buyer's
resistance
point
$eIIer's
target
point
$400 $475 $525 $600
9-29
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Issues in Negotiation
W Gender DiIIerences in egotiating $tyles
W Cultural DiIIerences in egotiating $tyle
9-30
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
ender Differences
W omen
More inclined to be concerned with Ieelings and
perceptions, and take a longer-term view.
View the bargaining session as part oI an overall
relationship.
%end to want all parties in the negotiation to be
empowered.
&se dialogue to achieve understanding.
W en
View the bargaining session as a separate event.
&se dialogue to persuade.
9-31
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Cross-CuIturaI Negotiation
W egotiating styles vary across national culture
French: Like conIlict.
hinese: Draw out negotiations, believing they never
end.
1apanese: egotiate to develop relationships and
commitment. Early oIIers lead to more inIormation
sharing and better integrative outcomes.
Americans: mpatient, desire to be liked.
9-32
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
hibit 9-8 Negotiating Attitude:
in-in or in Lose
9-33
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
$ummary and ImpIications
1. What is conflict?
ConIlict occurs when one party perceives that another
party`s actions will have a negative eIIect on
something the Iirst party cares about.
2. How can conflict be resolved?
Depending on how a conIlict is deIined, they can be
settled in a win-lose solution or a win-win solution.
3. What are the effects of conflict?
ConIlict can be Iunctional and improve group
perIormance, or it can be dysIunctional and hinder it.
9-34
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
$ummary and ImpIications
4. How does one negotiate effectively?
ntegrative bargaining tends to provide outcomes that
satisIy all parties and build lasting relationships.
5. What are some of the contemporary issues in
negotiation?
egotiation styles diIIer between genders and across
cultures.
9-35
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
OB at ork
9-36
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
For #eview
1. What are the disadvantages to conIlict? What are its
advantages?
2. &nder what conditions might conIlict be beneIicial to
a group?
3. What is the diIIerence between Iunctional and
dysIunctional conIlict? What determines
Iunctionality?
4. What is dual concern theory?
5. What is the diIIerence between a conciliator and a
mediator?
9-37
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
For #eview
6. What causes personality conIlicts, and how can they
be resolved?
7. What deIines the bargaining zone in distributive
bargaining?
8. Why isn`t integrative bargaining more widely
practised in organizations?
9. How do men and women diIIer, iI at all, in their
approaches to negotiations?
10. How can you improve your negotiating
eIIectiveness?
9-38
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
For CriticaI Thinking
1. Do you think competition and conIlict are diIIerent? Explain.
2. 'Participation is an excellent method Ior identiIying diIIerences and
resolving conIlicts. Do you agree or disagree? Discuss.
3. rom your own experience, describe a situation you were involved in
where the conIlict was dysIunctional. Describe another example, Irom
your experience, where the conIlict was Iunctional. ow analyze how
other parties in both conIlicts might have interpreted the situation in
terms oI whether the conIlicts were Iunctional or dysIunctional.
4. ssume one oI your co-workers had to negotiate a contract with
someone Irom China. What problems might he or she Iace? I the co-
worker asked Ior advice, what suggestions would you give to help
Iacilitate a settlement?
5. Michael Eisner, CEO at the Walt Disney Corporation, wanted to
stimulate conIlict inside his Iirm. ut he wants to minimize conIlict
with outside partiesagents, contractors, unions, etc. What does this
say about conIlict levels, Iunctional versus dysIunctional conIlict, and
managing conIlict.
9-39
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Point-CounterPoint
W onflict Is Good for
the rganization
ConIlict is a means by
which to bring about radical
change.
ConIlict Iacilitates group
cohesiveness.
ConIlict improves group
and organizational
eIIectiveness.
ConIlict brings about a
slightly higher, more
constructive level oI
tension.
W All onflicts Are
Dysfunctional!
%he negative consequences
Irom conIlict can be
devastating.
EIIective managers build
teamwork, not conIlict.
Competition is good Ior an
organization, but not
conIlict.
Managers who accept and
stimulate conIlict don`t
survive in organizations.
9-40
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
Breakout roup ercises
W orm small groups to discuss the Iollowing:
1. You and two other students carpool to school every day. %he
driver has recently taken to playing a new radio station quite
loudly. You do not like the music, or the loudness. &sing
one oI the conIlict-handling intentions, indicate how you
might go about resolving this conIlict.
2. &sing the example above, identiIy a number oI %s
(best alternatives to a negotiated agreement) available to
you, and then decide whether you would continue
carpooling.
3. Which conIlict-handling style is most consistent with how
you deal with conIlict? s your style eIIective? Why or why
not?
9-41
Langton, Robbins and Judge, Organizational Behaviour. iIth Cdn. Ed.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education Canada
From Concepts to $kiIIs: Negotiating
W egin with a positive overture.
W ddress problems, not personalities.
W Pay little attention to initial oIIers.
W Emphasize win-win solutions.
W Create an open and trusting climate.