Conflict

Confrontation and Escalation

Conflict escalate. Although the parties to the conflict may hope to reach a solution to their dispute quickly, a host os psychological and interpersonal factors can frustrate their attempts to control the conflict.

Uncertainty

Commitment

As conflict escalate, group members doubts and uncertainties are replaced by a firm commitment to their position.

They seek out information that supports their views, they reject information that conflicts with their stance, and they become entrenched in their original position.

Uncertainty

Commitment

Once people commit to a position publicly, they must stick with it. they may realize that they are wrong, but to save face, they continue to argue with their opponents. Dollar auction can illustrate the impact of commitment to conflict.

Perception

Misperception

Individuals reactions during conflict are shaped in fundamental ways by their perception of the situation and the people in that situation.

Perception

Misperception

When group members argue, they must determine why they argue. - if the argument is the group attempts to make a right decision, disagreement will not probably turn into true conflict, but if the disagreement is about the others incompetence, belligerence or argumentativeness, disagreement can escalate into conflict.

Perception

Misperception

If perceptions were always accurate, people would understand one another better. Unfortunately, perceptual biases regularly distort individuals inferences. They fall prey to the fundamental attribution error (FAE) and assume that other peoples behavior is caused by personal (dispositional) rather than situational (environmental) factors.

Perception

Misperception

Because of the FAE, group members assume that people who give them critical feedback, argue with them, or mistreat them in some way do so deliberately, and that their actions reflect basic flaws in their personalities.

Perception

Misperception

Four possible strategies: - competition - cooperation - individualism - altruism When describing their partners motives, the players were most accurate when playing an individualistic or competitive person, and least accurate in interpreting cooperation and altruism.

Weak Tactics Tactics

Stronger

People use weaker tactics at the outset of a conflict, but as the conflict escalates, they shift to stronger and stronger tactics.

Weak Tactics Tactics

Behavior

Stronger
Example Percentag e Using

Request Statements Demands Complaints Problem solving Third party Angry Threat Harassment

Abuse

May I use the glue? We need the glue. Give me the glue, now! Whats wrong with you? Why dont you share? You can use our stapler if you share the glue. Make them share. Im mad now. Give me the glue or else. Im not giving you anymore ribbon until you return the glue. You are a selfish swine.

100.0 100.0 88.9 79.2 73.6 45.8 41.7 22.2 16.7

0.7

Weak Tactics Tactics

Stronger

People who use stronger tactics often overwhelm their antagonists, but such methods intensify conflicts.

Trucking Game Experiment, a research procedure developed by Morton Deutsch and Robert Krauss in their studies of conflict between individuals who differ in their capacity to threaten and punish others.

Reciprocity Spiral

Upward Conflict

Conflict-ridden groups may seem normless, with hostility and dissatisfaction spinning out of control. Yet upward conflict spirals are in many cases sustained by the reciprocity, for that norm suggests that people who harm you are also deserving of harm themselves.

Reciprocity Spiral

Upward Conflict

If interactants followed the norm of reciprocity exactly, a mild threat would elicit a mild threat in return, and an attack would lead to a counterattack. But interactants tend to follow the norm of rough reciprocity- they give too much (overwhleming) or too little (undermatching) in return.

Few

Many

Coalitions exist in more groups, but when conflict erupts, group members use coalition to shift the balance of power in their favor.

The initial disagreement may involve only two group members, but as conflicts intensify, previously neutral members often join with one faction.

Few

Many

Coalitions can even link rivals who decide to join forces temporarily to achieve specific outcome. Coalitions contribute to conflicts because they draw more members of the group into the fray.

Few

Many

Coalitions often viewed as contentious, heavyhanded influence tactics. Coalitions form with people and against other people. Thus, coalitions must be constantly maintained through strategic bargaining and negotiation.

Irritation

Anger

Few people can remain calm and collected in a conflict. When disputes arise, tempers flare, and this increase in negative emotions exacerbates the initial conflict. Even when group members begin by discussing their points calmly and dispassionately, as they become locked into their positions, emotional expression begins to replace logical discussion.

Irritation

Anger

Group members, when negotiating with someone who has become angry, tend to become angry themselves.

Conflict resolution
Commitment Negotiation

Negotiation is a reciprocal communication process whereby two or more parties to a dispute examine specific issues, explain their positions, and exchange offers and counteroffers.

Two types
1. Distributive negotiation retain competitive orientation and make small concessions. 2. Integrative negotiation not competitive conflict management method. types of negotiators: soft bargaining, hard bargaining, and principled negotiators.

1. Soft bargaining -too close to competition, gentle style of negotiation. 2. Hard bargaining -tough, competitive tactics. - take it or leave it, Ill see you in court 3. Principle bargaining -seek integrative solutions -focus on the problem

Comparisons between the three approaches to negotiation.

Element Perception of others Goal Soft negotiation Friend Agreement Hard negotiation Adversaries victory Principle negotiation Problem solvers A wise outcome reached efficiently and amicably

Concessions

Make concessions Demand to cultivate the concessions as a relationship condition of relationship

Be soft on the people and the problem Trust others Change your position easily Be hard on the problem and the people Distrust others Dig into your position

Separate the people from he problem

People vs Problem Trust Position

Be soft on the people, hard on the problem Proceed independently of trust Focus on interests, not position

Negotiation bottom line Losses and gain

Make offers Disclose your bottom line Accept one sided losses to reach agreement Search for a single answer- the one they will accept Insist on agreement Avoid a contest of wills

Make threats Mislead as to your bottom line Demand one-sided gains as a price of agreement Search for a single answer-the one you will accept Insist on your position Win the contest of wills

Explore interest Avoid having a bottom line Invent options for mutual gains Develop multiple options to choose from; decide later Insist using objective criteria Reach a result based on standards, independent of will

Search

Criteria

Contest of will

Pressure

Yield to pressure

Apply pressure

Reason and be open to reason; yield to principle,

Misperception

Understanding

-conflicts are based on misperception.

-actively communicating. -communication is no cure-all for conflict.

Strong tactics

Cooperative tactics

Group members cope with conflict in different ways. Four basic categories: 1. Avoiding inaction 2. Yielding giving in to the demand of others. 3. Fighting forcing others to accept their view. 4. Cooperative rely on cooperation

The four basic methods of dealing with conflict

Dimension Negative Positive

Active

Fighting

Cooperative

Passive

Avoiding

Yielding

Upward Downward conflict spirals

- consistent cooperation increase mutual trust.
- continually compete with each other, mutual rust become elusive. tit for tat (TFT) bargaining strategy that begins with cooperation, but then imitates the other persons choice so that cooperation is met with cooperation and competition with competition.

What is the best way to manage conflicts?

What should you do when a conflict takes over your group? Should you encourage members to deal, up front and directly, with their dispute? Or is it best to just look the other way and let the hard feeling fade with the passage of time?

Carsten De Dreu

And his colleagues suggested that collaborative approaches sometimes aggravate the group conflict more than they molify it. Negative and positive methods of dealing with conflicts were both associated with negative team functioning Only avoiding responses were associated with increases in group adjustment to the conflict

Avoidance

Either we play or we fight. Sometimes, the best way to deal with someone who is disagreeable, irritating, or aggravating is to ignore the conflict and focus instead on the work to be done.

Tit For Tat Strategy

Cooperation is met with cooperation and competition with competition A provocable, forgiving and reciprocal strategy TFT is less effective when:
Theres

any delay in responding to cooperation If a group member competes is not countered quickly its in a noisy interaction or larger groups

Mediators

Help group members reach a mutually agreeable solution to their dispute Inquisitorial Procedure: mediator questions the two parties and hands down a verdict that the two parties must accept Arbitration: the disputants present their arguments to the mediator, who then bases his or her decision on the information they provide Moot: the disputants and the mediator openly and informally discuss problems and solutions, but the mediator can make no binding decisions

NOTE: if the disputants want to resolve the conflict on their own terms, third-party interventions are considered an unwanted intrusion

Composure

Positive affective responses increase concession making, creative problem solving, cooperation, and the use of non-contenious bargaining strategies Hence, when tempers flare, the group should encourage members to regain control over their emotions

Ways in reducing conflicts

Count to ten technique Calling a time out Expressing concerns in a written (and carefully edited) letter or email Humor into the group discussion Apologies Developing norms that prohibit shows of strong, negative emotion

Value of Conflict

Conflict is a natural consequence of joining a group It is also an undeniably powerful process in groups
For

example, the Apple company

Insofar as conflict is resolved successfully, it could stabilized the group and serve as a unifying force

Advantages of Conflict

Expands the range of options Generates new alternatives Enhances the groups unity Make group goals explicit Help members understand their role in the group better

Disadvantages of Conflict

Can do more harm than good Undermines satisfaction Disrupts performance Engenders negative emotions Can trigger violence

Types of Conflicts

Relationship conflict: causes interpersonal disruptions Task conflict: stimulate members to improve the way they work together

Summary

What is conflict? Conflict: actions and beliefs of one or more members of the group are unacceptable to and resisted by the other members Intergroup conflict: involves two or more groups Intragroup conflict: occurs within a group Follows a cycle from conflict escalation to resolution

What are the sources of conflict in groups?

1.

Most common sources are competition, conflicts over the distribution of resources, power struggles, decisional conflicts, and personal conflicts Competition creates conflict by pitting members against one another, whereas cooperation leads to mutual gain

2.

Mixed-motive situations stimulate conflict for it tempt individuals to compete rather than cooperate Norm of reciprocity encourages responding to competition by competing Those with a social values orientation are more likely to compete than are those with cooperative or individualistic orientations Both sexes use more contentius influence methods when paired with a man

3. Social dilemmas tempt members to act in their own self interest to the detriment of the group and its goals Disputes arise when one or more member:
Exploit a shared resource Do not contribute their share in a dilemma Disagree on how to divide up resources Do not agree on the norms to follow when appointing resources Avoid blame for group failure or take too much personal responsibility for group success

4. Members respond negatively to perceived mistreatment because it calls into question their status and inclusion 5. Power struggles: members vie for control over leadership, status, and position 6. Substantive conflict stems from disagreements about issues that are relevant to the groups goals and outcomes 7. Procedural conflict occur when members do not agree on group strategies, policies, and methods

8. Personal conflict occurs when individual members do not like one another
Any

factor that causes disaffection between group members can increase personal conflict More prevalent in diverse groups Balance theory predicts that group members will respond negatively when they disagree with those they like or agree with those they dislike

Why does conflict escalate?

1.

2.

3.

Once conflict begins, it often intensifies before it begins When individuals defend their viewpoints, they become more committed to their positions Conflict is exacerbated by members tendency to misperceive others and to assume that the other partys behavior is caused by personal rather than situational factors

4. Conflict between individuals escalated when each side could threaten the other 5. Other factors that contributes to conflict
Negative

reciprocity, as when negative actions provoke negative reactions in other Formation of coalitions that embroil formerly neutral members in the conflict Angry emotions that trigger expressions of anger by others

1.

2.

How can group members manage their conflict? By negotiation, to identify the issues underlying the dispute and work together to identify a satisfying solution to both sides By actively communicating information about their motives and goals through discussion

3. Avoiding, yielding, fighting, and cooperating

Cooperation

is more likely to promote group unity than all other tactics Personal conflicts may not yield to cooperative negotiations

4. Tit for tat strategy 5. Mediators can reduce conflict by imposing solutions or guiding disputants to a compromise 6. Positive affective responses reduce conflict

Does conflict, when resolved, lead to improved group functioning? Conflict is a natural consequence of joining a group and cannot be avoided completely Conflicts, when resolved successfully, can promote group functioning, but in general, conflict can do more harm than good

fin