UNIT 5: MANAGING CONFLICT & CHANGE

2020_PHC528

B.M. Hlalele
E. Tshobeka
Learning outcomes
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
• Define conflict
• Differentiate among the traditional, interactionist and managed-conflict
views of conflict
• Outline the conflict process
• Define negotiation
• Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining
• Apply the five steps of the negotiation process
• Show how individual differences influence negotiations
• Assess the roles and functions of third-party negotiations

2
Key topics
1. A definition of conflict
2. Transitions in conflict thought
3. The conflict process
4. Negotiation
5. Summary and implications for managers

3
A definition of conflict
Conflict: A process that begins when one party
perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to
affect negatively, something that the first party cares about.

4
 Transitions in conflict thought
Traditional view of conflict: The belief that all
conflict is harmful and should be avoided.
• This view prevailed in the 1930s and 1940s
• It fell out of favour as researchers realised that some level of conflict is
unavoidable
Interactionist view of conflict: The belief that
conflict is not only a positive force in a group, but also
an absolute necessity for a group to perform effectively.
Functional conflict: Conflict that supports the goals of
the group and improves its performance.
Dysfunctional conflict: Conflict that hinders group
performance.

5
 Transitions in conflict thought

• We need to examine the type of conflict in order to differentiate between

functional and dysfunctional conflict
Task conflict: Conflict over content and goals of the
work.
Relationship conflict: Conflict based on interpersonal
relationships.
Process conflict: Conflict over how the work gets done.
Resolution-focused view of conflict
• The traditional view was short-sighted in assuming all conflict should be
eliminated and the interactionist view is incomplete
• The resolution-focused view recognises that conflict is probably inevitable and
focuses on productive conflict resolution
6
The conflict process
Conflict process: A process that has five stages:
potential opposition or incompatibility, cognition and
personalisation, intentions, behaviours and outcomes.
The conflict process

7
The conflict process
Stage 1: Potential opposition or incompatibility

Communication
• Communication can be a source of conflict due to semantic difficulties,
misunderstandings and “noise” in communication channels
Structure
• Structural variables such as size of the group, jurisdictional clarity, leadership
styles, ambiguity about responsibility and reward systems can stimulate
conflict
Personal variables
• Personal variables include personality, emotions and values
• People high in disagreeableness, neuroticism or self-monitoring tend to get
into conflicts more often and react poorly when conflicts do occur

8
 The conflict process
Stage 2: Cognition and personalisation

• If the conditions cited in Stage 1 negatively affect something one party cares
about, the potential for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualised in
Stage 2
Perceived conflict: Awareness by one or more parties
of the existence of conditions that create opportunities
for conflict to arise.
Felt conflict: Emotional involvement in a conflict that
creates anxiety, tenseness, frustration or hostility.
• Stage 2 is important because it is where conflict issues tend to be defined and
where parties decide what the conflict is about
• Emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions - negative emotions allow us
to oversimplify issues and lose trust, where positive feelings increase our
tendency to see potential relationships among elements of a problem

9
The conflict process
Stage 3: Intentions

Intentions: Decisions to act in a given way.

Competing: A desire to satisfy one’s interests, regardless
of the impact on the other party to the conflict.
Collaborating: A situation in which the parties to a conflict
each desire to satisfy fully the concerns of all parties.
Avoiding: The desire to withdraw from or suppress a
conflict.
Accommodating: The willingness of one party in a conflict
to place the opponent’s interests above his or her own.
Compromising: A situation in which each party to a
conflict is willing to give up something.

10
The conflict process
Stage 3: Intentions

Dimensions of conflict-handling intentions

11
The conflict process
Stage 4: Behaviour

Conflict management: The use of resolution and

stimulation techniques to achieve the desired level of conflict.
Conflict management techniques

12
The conflict process
Stage 4: Behaviour

Conflict management techniques (cont.)

Conflict-intensity continuum

13
 The conflict process
Stage 5: Outcomes

Functional outcomes
• Conflict is constructive when it improves quality of decisions, stimulates creativity
and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group members,
provides a medium through which problems can be aired and tensions released,
and fosters an environment of self-evaluation and change
Dysfunctional outcomes
• Destructive consequences of conflict on the performance of a group or
organisation are generally well-known: uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent,
which acts to dissolve common ties and eventually leads to the destruction of the
group

14
Negotiation

Negotiation: A process in which two or more parties

exchange goods or services and attempt to agree on the
exchange rate for them.
Distributive versus integrative bargaining

15
Negotiation

Distributive bargaining: Negotiation that seeks to divide

up a fixed amount of resources; a win-lose situation.
Fixed pie: The belief that there is only a set amount of
goods or services to be divided up between the parties.
Integrative bargaining: Negotiation that seeks one or
more settlements that can create a win-win solution.
Staking out the bargaining zone

CHAPTER 15: CONFLICT AND NEGOTIATION 16

 The negotiation process

Negotiation

Figure 15.6 p 550

Preparation and planning
• Do your homework regarding the nature of the conflict, who is involved and what
your goals and the other party’s goals are
• Also consider the effect that the negotiation will have on the relationships
between the parties
BATNA: The best alternative to a negotiated agreement;the least an
individual should accept.

17
 Negotiation
Individual differences in negotiation effectiveness

• Negotiators who are agreeable or extraverted are not very successful at distributive
bargaining
• The best distributive bargainer appears to be a disagreeable introvert
• In distributive bargaining, negotiators in a position of power or equal status who
show anger negotiate better outcomes; people in less powerful positions who show
anger get worse outcomes
• In integrative negotiations, positive moods and emotions lead to more integrative
agreements
• Some negotiation tactics yield superior outcomes across cultures
• Men and women do not negotiate differently, but gender does affect negotiation
outcomes - men have been found to negotiate better outcomes than women,
although the difference is relatively small

18
 Negotiation
Third-party negotiations

• Occasionally, individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate and are

unable to resolve their difference through direct negotiations – in such cases they
may turn to a third party for help
Mediator: A neutral third party who facilitates a
negotiated solution by using reasoning, persuasion and
suggestions.
Arbitrator: A third party to a negotiation who has the
authority to dictate an agreement.
Conciliator: A trusted third party who provides an informal
communication link between the negotiator and the
opponent.

19
Summary and implications for managers

Conflict and unit performance

20
 SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS

• Conflict can be either too high or too low to be constructive

• Select conflict-handling approaches appropriate to the situation – competition,
collaboration, avoidance, accommodation and compromise
• Distributive bargaining can resolve disputes, but it often reduces the satisfaction of one
or more negotiators because it is confrontational and focused on the short term
• Integrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to provide outcomes that satisfy all parties
and build lasting relationships
• Make sure you set aggressive negotiating goals and try to find creative ways to achieve
the objectives of both parties, especially when you value the long-term relationship
with the other party. That does not mean sacrificing your self-interest; rather, it means
trying to find creative solutions that give both parties what they really want

21
Thank you
Hlalele & Tshobeka