International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5

ISSN: 2222-6990

Interpersonal Conflict: A Substantial Factor to

Organizational Failure
Malikeh Beheshtifar
Management Department, Rafsanjan Branch, Islamic AZAD University, Iran

Elham Zare
Management Department, Rafsanjan Branch, Islamic AZAD University, Iran
Abstract
Interpersonal conflict is conflict that occurs between two or more individuals that work
together in groups or teams. This is a conflict that occurs between two or more individuals.
Many individual differences lead to interpersonal conflict, including personalities, culture,
attitudes, values, perceptions, and the other differences. Conflict arises due to a variety of
factors. Individual differences in goals, expectations, values, proposed courses of action, and
suggestions about how to best handle a situation are unavoidable. Moreover, identifying the
factors which cause conflict in any organization is considered the main stage in the process of
conflict management. The management of interpersonal conflict involves changes in the
attitudes, behavior, and organization structure, so that the organizational members can work
with each other effectively for attaining their individual and/or joint goals. The management of
interpersonal conflict essentially involves teaching organizational members the styles of
handling interpersonal conflict to deal with different situations effectively and setting up
appropriate mechanisms so that unresolved issues are dealt with properly. The researcher
recommends other scholars to identify the other factors of organizational conflict, such as
identifying a list of factors causing intrapersonal conflict.
Keywords: conflict, interpersonal conflict, sources of conflict
Introduction
The conflict comprises a series of human affective states such as: anxiety, hostility, resistance,
open aggression, as well as the types of opposition and antagonistic interaction, including
competition.
Whether conflict within an organization is focused as desirable or not, the fact is that conflict
exists and is usual culture. As human beings interact in organizations, differing values and
situations create tension relationship. Conflict is viewed as a situation in which two or more
individuals operating within a unit appear to be incompatible (Chuang & Tzy-Ning, 2003). Jehn
and Bendersky (2003) described conflict as perceived incompatibilities or discrepant views
among the parties involved.
Authors writing on organizational behavior call conflict within organizations organizational
conflict (OC) which can take on any of several different forms, including intrapersonal,
400

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

interpersonal, intergroup and inter-organizational conflicts. It can be noted that the prefix
inter means "between," whereas the prefix intra means "within" (Elmagri, & Eaton, 2011).
Also, research in interpersonal conflict management has a rich tradition from both western and
Asian perspectives (Oetzel & Ting-Toomey, 2006). Many interpersonal conflict studies are based
on Blake and Moutons (1964) dual concern model. This model was theorized on the basis of
the degree of the influence of self-other orientation in interpersonal conflict management, and
posited five styles of integrating, compromising, obliging, dominating, and avoiding based on
self-other orientations. To illustrate, integrating is a strategy involving a high self and other
orientation, while avoiding is a strategy involving a low self and other orientation.
Compromising is a strategy involving a medium degree of self and other orientation.
Dominating is a strategy involving a high self-orientation whereas obliging is with high otherorientation.
For many years, conflict management researchers tried to determine how conflict could be
reduced, eliminated and resolved in organizations. The implicit assumption was that conflict
was detrimental to the organization and that it would be beneficial to reduce or eliminate
conflict. More recently, researchers have asked questions that may be more useful: when, and
under what circumstances, is conflict detrimental and when and under what circumstances
does it benefit the organization? Thus, conflict is not assumed to be good or bad but rather it is
recognized as a factor that can be both. The impetus then becomes attempting to manage
conflict in a way that will ameliorate or eliminate its destructive effects while capitalizing on
and enhancing its constructive effects (Williams, 2011).
According above, this study is tried to familiar interpersonal conflict, sources of conflict, and
ways to overcome conflict in workplace.
Interpersonal conflict
The conflicts may be intrapersonal or interpersonal. The intrapersonal conflicts are attributed
only to those who participate in the project (conflicts of values, of priorities etc). The
interpersonal conflicts or the social conflicts are conflicts that manifest between people which
are involved in the project or between different groups of interest. The interpersonal conflict is
the process through which a person or a department frustrates another from obtaining the
wanted result. The observation of this kind of conflict it is very important even from the
beginning in order to be stopped, and for this a good specialist has certain clues which he can
use discreetly (Nistorescu, 2006).
In the other word, interpersonal conflict is conflict that occurs between two or more individuals
that work together in groups or teams (Wood et al., 2003). This is a conflict that occurs
between two or more individuals. Many individual differences lead to interpersonal conflict,
including personalities, culture, attitudes, values, perceptions, and the other differences
(Elsayed-Elkhouly, 1996).
Personality conflict refers to very strong differences in motives, values or styles in dealing with
people that are not resolvable. For example, if both parties in a relationship have a high need
for power and both want to be dominant in the relationship, there is no way for both to be
satisfied, and a power struggle ensues. Common tactics used in interpersonal power struggles
include the exaggerated use of rewards and punishments, deception and evasion, threats and
401

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

emotional blackmail, and flattery or ingratiation. Unresolved power conflict usually recycles and
escalates to the point of relationship breakdown and termination (Fisher, 2000).
Interpersonal conflict may include rude behavior but, unlike workplace incivility, interpersonal
conflict would also include instances of respectful yet contentious disagreement. As noted,
interpersonal conflict has long been considered a stressful job demand and as such it should
positively influence job strain according to the demands-control model. That is, in the demandscontrol model, work load demands, conflicts or other stressors. . .place the individual in a
motivated or energized state of stress, and unless the individual can somehow take action to
cope with the stressor, the unreleased energy induced by job stressors will manifest itself
internally, producing distress and strain (Ilies, et al., 2011).
Jehns (1995) typology of interpersonal conflict includes task and relationship conflict. This view
of interpersonal conflict proposes that both types of interpersonal conflict are distinct, based
on the differing conceptual relationships that each is expected to have with outcomes.
However, the two types of conflict perceptions may be interrelated, such that a group with
many relationship conflicts may also have a high number of task conflicts and vice versa.
Task and relationship conflict can also share some conceptual overlap, as each type of conflict
may affect the other. Task conflict may turn into relationship conflict if perceived as a personal
disagreement. Misattributions about viewpoints or opinions could lead an individual to assume
that his or her competence is being challenged and relationship conflict might result (Williams,
2011).
Sources of conflict
Conflict arises due to a variety of factors. Individual differences in goals, expectations, values,
proposed courses of action, and suggestions about how to best handle a situation are
unavoidable. When we add to these differences the unease arising out of a business' future,
conflict often increases (Walker, 1986, p137-149).
Baron (1990; see also Mack & Snyder, 1957), after reviewing a number of recent definitions of
conflict, concluded that although definitions are not identical, they overlap with respect to the
following elements:
1. Conflict includes opposing interests between individuals or groups in a zero-sum situation;
2. Such opposed interests must be recognized for conflict to exist;
3. Conflict involves beliefs, by each side, that the other will thwart (or has already thwarted) its
interests;
4. Conflict is a process; it develops out of existing relationships between individuals or groups
and reflects their past interactions and the contexts in which these took place; and
5. Actions by one or both sides do, in fact, produce thwarting of others goals (p. 199).
One of the early theorists on conflict, Daniel Katz (1965), created a typology that distinguishes
three main sources of conflict: economic, value, and power.
Economic conflict involves competing motives to attain scarce resources. Each party
wants to get the most that it can, and the behavior and emotions of each party are
directed toward maximizing its gain. Union and management conflict often has as one of
its sources the incompatible goals of how to slice up the economic pie.
402

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

Value conflict involves incompatibility in ways of life, ideologies the preferences,

principles and practices that people believe in. International conflict (e.g., the Cold War)
often has a strong value component, wherein each side asserts the rightness and
superiority of its way of life and its political-economic system.
Power conflict occurs when each party wishes to maintain or maximize the amount of
influence that it exerts in the relationship and the social setting. It is impossible for one
party to be stronger without the other being weaker, at least in terms of direct influence
over each other. Thus, a power struggle ensues which usually ends in a victory and
defeat, or in a stand-off with a continuing state of tension. Power conflicts can occur
between individuals, between groups or between nations, whenever one or both parties
choose to take a power approach to the relationship. Power also enters into all conflict
since the parties are attempting to control each other (Fisher, 2000).
Additionally, according to the literature, there are innumerable origins of organizational dispute
and each produces its own variety of effects. In general, there are six major sources: (i) the
interpersonal disagreements that arise when one person is experiencing individual stress; (ii)
the problems resulting from role conflict, a condition that occurs when there is a clash over
one's role in the organization; (iii) the power struggles that pit persons and groups against one
another to achieve their own selfish objectives; (iv) the misunderstandings and disagreements
from differentiation, i.e., the clashes that arise because people approach common problems
from very different orientations; (v) the interdependence requirements for
collaboration which, if not extensive and balanced between the parties, cause communication
and interaction breakdowns which, in turn, if critical, lead to more intensive conflicts; and (vi)
the external pressures from forces outside the enterprise that breed internal pressures as the
system seeks to adapt but not to disrupt its internal order (Hotepo, et al., 2010).
The researcher prefers to incorporate all these various factors in a list which can be organized
into two broad categories: personal factors and organizational factors.
Personal factors: which arise from differences among individuals. They can be divided into:
Individual differences: everyone thinks, feels, looks, or acts alike, and some people simply rub
us the wrong way, and we cannot necessarily explain why, personality differences can also
cause conflict as well as different values and beliefs;
Threats to status: the social rank of a person in a group is very important to many people in
any organization. Therefore, when they feel that they will lose their status, they become a
powerful driving force and struggle to maintain a desired image;
lack of trust: every continuing relationship requires some degree of trust that opens up
boundaries, provides opportunities in which to act, and enriches the entire social fabric of an
organization;
Incivility: workplace incivility occurs when employees fail to exhibit concern and regard for
others or - worse yet--disrespect each other on the job. Lack of consideration can appear in
many forms, including brusque greetings, sarcasm, failure to return borrowed supplies,
selfishness, showing up late for appointments, untidiness, noise (such as playing a radio loudly
(Elmagri, & Eaton, 2011).
Organizational factors: those stem from nature of the organization and the way in which work
is organized. They can be divided into:
403

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

Limitation of resources: all organizations have limited resources and attempt to find the most
efficient way to divide the resources and accomplish tasks. One study found that competition
for limited resources often leads to negative conflict;
Unfair treatment: Some organizations have a strong status difference between managers and
non-managers (employees). For example, managers have flexible schedules, personal
telephone calls allowed at work, and longer lunch hours which are not available to other
employees. This may lead to resentment and conflict;
Role ambiguity: when an individual does not have adequate information on the nature of the
work required of him in the organization or when he has a lack of determined competences or
lack of defined responsibilities. This may lead him into conflict with others;
Role incompatibility: in this situation conflict occur when an individual finds himself do more
one role which include incompatible goals;
Organizational change: with the pace of technological, political and social change increasing
and the marketplace hurtling toward a global economy. Organizational changes will be overpresent and then conflict will exist;
Contradiction of goals: out of necessity, organization members frequently pursue goals that
are somewhat different from one another and they are sometimes incompatible or
contradiction, thus setting the stage for potential conflicts;
Information deficiency: This source of conflict results from communication breakdown in the
organization. It may be that the two employees in conflict are using different information or
that one or both have misinformation. This source of conflict is not emotionally charged and
after corrected, there is little resentment;
Environmental stress: it is more likely that conflicts will occur in environments that are
characterized by a lack of resources, by downsizing, competitve pressures, or by high degrees of
uncertainty (Elmagri, & Eaton, 2011).
In another study, it has been found appropriate to classify conflict on the basis of these sources
for proper understanding of its nature and implications. Following is a brief description of this
classification:
1. Affective Conflict- This occurs when two interacting social entities, while trying to solve a
problem together, become aware that their feelings and emotions regarding some or all the
issues are incompatible
2. Substantive Conflict- This occurs when two or more organizational members disagree on
their task or content issues
3. Conflict of Interest- This is defined as an inconsistency between two parties in their
preferences for the allocation of a scarce resource. This type of conflict occurs when each
party, sharing the same understanding of the situation, prefers a different and somewhat
incompatible solution to a problem involving either a distribution of scarce resources between
them or a decision to share the work of solving it
4. Conflict of Values- This occurs when two social entities differ in their values or ideologies on
certain issues
5. Goal Conflict- This occurs when a preferred outcome or an end-state of two social entities
is inconsistent. In rare cases it may involve divergent preferences over all of the decision
outcomes, constituting a zero-sum game
404

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

6. Realistic versus Nonrealistic Conflict- The former refers to incompatibilities that have
rational content (i.e., tasks, goals, values, and means and ends). Nonrealistic conflict occurs as a
result of a partys need for releasing tension and expressing hostility, ignorance, or error.
7. Institutionalized versus Non-institutionalized Conflict- The former is characterized by
situations in which actors follow explicit rules, and display predictable behavior, and their
relationship has continuity, as in the case of linestaff conflict or labormanagement
negotiations.
8. Retributive Conflict- This conflict is characterized by a situation where the conflicting entities
feel the need for a drawn-out conflict to punish the opponent.
9. Misattributed Conflict- This relates to the incorrect assignment of causes (behaviors, parties,
or issues) to conflict.
10. Displaced Conflict- This type of conflict occurs when the conflicting parties either direct
their frustrations or hostilities to social entities who are not involved in conflict or argue over
secondary, not major, issues (Rahim, 2001).
Overcome to conflict
Moreover, identifying the factors which cause conflict in any organization is considered the
main stage in the process of conflict management. This idea has supported by many scholars
like Robbins and Judge, 2008; Schermerhorn et al., 2005; Rahim, 2002 (Elmagri, M.I. and Eaton,
D., 2011).
Conflict can be managed in different ways, some focusing on interpersonal relationships and
others on structural changes. Robinson et al (1974) advocates that managing conflict toward
constructive action is the best approach in resolving conflict in organization. When conflict
arises, we need to be able to manage them properly, so that it becomes a positive force, rather
than a negative force, which would threaten the individual or group.
Avoidance of the situation that causes the conflict is an example of an interpersonal approach
(Robert & Jane, 1969).
Rahim (1986) noted that organizational conflict should be managed rather than resolved to
enhance individual, group, and system wide effectiveness. The management of organizational
conflict involves the diagnosis of and intervention in conflict at intrapersonal, interpersonal,
intragroup, and intergroup levels. A diagnosis should indicate whether there is need for
intervention and the type of intervention needed. Intervention may be designed to attain and
maintain a moderate amount of conflict at various levels and to enable the organizational
members to learn the styles of handling interpersonal conflict so that the individual, group, and
overall organizational effectiveness are enhanced.
The management of interpersonal conflict involves changes in the attitudes, behavior, and
organization structure, so that the organizational members can work with each other
effectively for attaining their individual and/or joint goals. The management of interpersonal
conflict essentially involves teaching organizational members the styles of handling
interpersonal conflict to deal with different situations effectively and setting up appropriate
mechanisms so that unresolved issues are dealt with properly (Rahim, 2001).

405

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

Conclusion
Conflicts are part of human consciousness in all aspects of life. One cannot avoid conflict,
whether at home, at the office, or when watching television news. The consequences of
organizational conflict reach further today than ever before as the interface between work and
home blurs and organizations experiment with flatter and more decentralized structures. In
addition, the complexity of conflict increases as organizations become more open and diverse.
Conflict is inevitable and even desirable: To work in an organization is to be in conflict. To take
advantage of joint work requires conflict management (Tjosvold 2008: 19). Organizational
conflicts are inevitable and studies show that about 20 percent of employee time is spent on
managing conflicts (Rahim, 2000).
Pawlak (1998) suggests that conflict analysis and its resolutions has an important role in private,
public and political organizations, as well as in judicial and work disputes, in military operations
and many other institutions. The results from the study indicate that the major cause of
organizational conflicts is lack of resources.
Finally, the researcher recommends other scholars to identify the other factors of
organizational conflict, such as identifying a list of factors causing intrapersonal conflict. So, the
following are recommended: Managers should develop diverse but appropriate strategies to
resolve and manage conflicts; efforts should be made by the management to organize
seminars/workshops on organizational conflict management from time to time for the
employees.
References
1. Baron, R.A. (1990), Conflict in organizations. In K. R. Murphy & F. E. Saal (Eds.),
Psychology in organizations: Integrating science and practice (pp. 197216). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964), The managerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf.
3. Chuang, YS. & Tzy-Ning, L. (2003), Interpersonal Conflict Styles and Employees WellBeing Concern Study, International Business Department, Ching-Yun University
4. Elsayed-Elkhouly, S. M. (1996), Styles of Handling Personal Conflict in Egypt. United
States, Africa, and the Gulf States, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal,
Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 20-32
5. Elmagri, M.I. and Eaton, D. (2011), Identifying the Factors Causing Interpersonal Conflict
in
6. Organisations (Through Analysing Secondary Data), The Built & Human Environment
Review, Volume 4, Special Issue 1,, P. 60
7. Fisher, R. (2000), Sources of Conflict and Methods of Conflict Resolution, International
Peace and Conflict Resolution, School of International Service, The American University
8. Hotepo, OM., Asokere, AS., Abdul-Azeez, IA. & Ajemunigbohun, SA. (2010), Empirical
Study of the Effect of Conflict on Organizational Performance in Nigeria, Business and
Economics Journal, BEJ-15
406

www.hrmars.com/journals

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

May 2013, Vol. 3, No. 5
ISSN: 2222-6990

9. Ilies, R., Johnson, MD., Judge, TA. & Keeney, J. (2011), A within-individual study of
interpersonal conflict as a work stressor: Dispositional and situational moderators,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 4464
10. Jehn, K.A. (1995), A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of
intragroup conflict, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40, pp. 256-282
11. Jehn, K.A. and Bendersky, C. (2003), Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency
perspective, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25, pp. 189-244.
12. Nistorescu, t., 2006, PATTERNS AND STRATEGIES OF INTERPERSONAL CONFLICTS
MEDIATION DURING THE PROJECTS, University of Craiova
13. Oetzel, J. G., & Ting-Toomey, S. (2006), The Sage handbook of conflict communication.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Pawlak Z. (1998), An inquiry into anatomy of conflicts. Journal of Information Sciences,
109: 65-78.
15. Rahim, M. A.(1986), Managing Conflict in Organizations. Praeger Publishers, New York
16. Rahim, M. Afzalur.: Managing conflicts in organizations (Westport, CT: Quorum Books
2000)
17. Rahim, M. A.(2001), Managing Conflict in Organizations. Praeger Publishers, New York
18. Robert RB, Jane SM. (1969), Building a dynamic corporation through Grid Organization
development; Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, ISBN - 13: 9780201006124
19. Robinson J, Roy WJ, Clifford RA. (1974), Conflict Management in Community Groups,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, North-Central Regional Extension Publication
No. 36-45.
20. Tjosvold, D. (2008), The Conflict-positive Organization: it Depends Upon us, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 29, pp. 19-28
21. Walker, W.E. (1986), Changing Organizational Culture, University of Tennessee Press,
Knoxville, TN
22. Williams, F. (2011), Interpersonal Conflict: The Importance of Clarifying Manifest
Conflict Behavior, International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology Vol. 1
No. 3; P. 149

407

www.hrmars.com/journals