HRM 609: Conflict Management

Atikur Rahman,
MBA (HRM), BBA (Mgts), RU
Senior Lecturer of Business Administration
Faculty of Business Studies, PCIU
Email: [email protected]

1–2
 Individual Conflict
Individual conflict refers to an interpersonal incompatibility or differing
perceptions such as a difference of opinions and/or an unmatched
relationship in interacting with individual himself and/or with others. There
are two types of individual conflict. These are:

A.Interpersonal conflict: Interpersonal conflicts occur when two or more

people disagree about something. Interpersonal conflicts can arise in any
setting where people are involved: at work, at home, at school, and in
personal or professional relationships. Fortunately, there are several ways to
resolve conflict and emerge with the relationship intact.

B.Intrapersonal conflict: Intrapersonal conflict arises within a person. For

example, when you're uncertain about what is expected or wanted, or you
have a sense of being inadequate to perform a task, you are experiencing
intrapersonal conflict.
1–3
 Causes of Interpersonal Conflict
Lack of Role Clarification: Conflict can emerge when it is unclear who is
responsible for what task or what part of a project. Clear job descriptions
and expectations can reduce this contributor to conflict.

Poor Processes: Often poorly constructed processes and procedures can

create conflict. To avoid this pitfall, it is helpful to regularly review your
procedures and policies to ensure they support teamwork and collaboration.

Communication Problems: This is a common contributor to conflict and can

occur among all levels of staff. Keeping communication channels open and
having a culture where questions are welcomed will go a long way in
mitigating this contributor to conflict.

1–4
 Causes of Interpersonal Conflict
Lack of Performance Standards: When performance and quality standards are
not clear, individuals quickly sort out their own personal expectations around
work quantity and quality. This can put them at odds with others whose
standards are different. Leadership and management should be fair, clear, and
consistent in articulating performance standards.

Lack of Resources: If employees have to compete for resources, whether it’s

managerial support, tools, equipment, or financial resources, the stage is set for
competition and conflict. Asking employees what’s needed and then providing it
(if possible) will build a spirit of collaboration rather than competition.

Unreasonable Time Constraints: Workplace conflict can occur when coworkers

are not aware of the steps involved and the time others need to complete their
portion of a task or project. As a result, they may expect more of each other
than is reasonable. Taking time to consider job design and cross-training
employees can work to mitigate this contributor to conflict. 1–5
 Types of Interpersonal Conflict
1. Pseudo Conflict: This type of conflict is based on a difference of opinion or
a misunderstanding. An example might be when one person interprets what
another person said as something other than their intention. Usually, these
types of conflicts can be worked through quickly by talking through the
situation and clarifying needs and meaning.

2. Fact Conflict: A fact conflict occurs when two or more people disagree on
the facts about something. For example, one person is convinced that gas
prices are higher than ever before. Another person remembers a time that they
were higher. A fact conflict can be resolved by checking the facts.

3. Value Conflict: This type of conflict occurs when people have very different
values about something. These are usually things that people feel strongly
about, like gun control, abortion, education, or religious beliefs. Generally,
these beliefs are deep-rooted and this is not a conflict that is easily resolved.
1–6
 Types of Interpersonal Conflict
4. Policy Conflict: Policy conflicts occur when people disagree on what type of
policy, rule or procedure is best for addressing a certain problem. There are
many factors that go into why someone believes a certain approach may be the
best one. One way to work toward resolution is to remember the common goal
and look for areas of agreement. Remember that everyone is on the same team.

5. Ego Conflict: This type of conflict happens when disagreements get personal
and egos are involved. People may lash out or become defensive and triggered.
People may get stubborn and refuse to back down. These types of agreements
can go around and around without resolution.

6. Meta Conflict: A meta conflict is when people argue about arguing. Things
like “You never listen to me! You make everything about you! Don’t talk to me
that way!” The argument then spirals into an argument about the argument, and
the initial conflict is no longer even being discussed.
1–7
 Principles of Interpersonal Conflict
Conflict Is Inevitable: Conflict is a part of every interpersonal relationship,
between patrons and children, brothers and sisters, friends, lovers,
coworkers.

Conflict Is Influenced by Culture and Gender: Women want to get closer to

the conflict; they want to talk about it and resolve it. Culture influences not
only the issues that people fight about but also what people consider
appropriate and inappropriate in terms of dealing with conflict. Men are
more apt to withdraw from a conflict situation than are women.

Conflict Can Center on a Variety of Issues: Nine issues are at the heart of
couples conflicts: free time, money, household responsibilities, politics, sex,
children and pets, religion, jealousy, and stress.

1–8
 Principles of Interpersonal Conflict
Conflict Can Occur in All Communication Forms: Conflict face to face can also
happen online.

Conflict Can Be Negative or Positive: Conflict often leads to increased negative

as well as positive outcome for the parties.

Conflict Styles Have Consequences: Accommodating conflict style is when you

sacrifice your own needs for the needs of the other person(s); Avoidance conflict
style are relatively unconcerned with their own or with their opponents' needs
and desires; Competitive conflict style involves great concern for your own
needs and desires and little for those of others; Collaborating conflict style is
when you address both your own and the other person's needs; Compromising
conflict style is in the middle: there's some concern for your own needs and
some concern for the other's needs

1–9
 Stages of Interpersonal Conflict Resolution
There are different stages of conflict resolution. These stages have been
mentioned as under:

1. Define the conflict

2. Examine the possible solutions
3. Test a solution
4. Evaluate the solutions
5. Accept or reject the solution

1–10
 Interpersonal Conflict Management Strategies
The strategies are:

1. Win-Lose and Win-Win strategies

2. Avoidance and fighting actively strategy
3. Defensiveness and Supportiveness strategy
4. Face detracting and face enhancing strategies
5. Verbal aggressiveness and argumentativeness strategy

1–11
 Pondy Five Stages Model of Conflict
Pondy (1967) presented a model of organizational conflict that identified five
stages of Conflict episode:

1. The latent stage

2. The perceived stage
3. The felt stage
4. The manifest stage, and
5. The aftermath stage

1–12
 Pondy Five Stages Model of Conflict
The Latent Stage: Sometimes, prior to the latent stage is a stage where there
exist no conflicting facts and interests yet, let alone its awareness. The latent
stage is the first stage of conflict. In this stage, conflict is already in existence
but the parties are yet to be aware of its existence. To this extent, the facts
constituting the basis of the conflict are such that would be displeasing to the
parties if they become aware of it. At this stage, conflict is yet to arise because
there is no knowledge and awareness of the existing facts yet.

The Perceived Stage: From the word ‘perceived’, the parties under this stage
are beginning to recognize and become aware of the existing position capable of
metamorphosing into conflict. This stage is sometimes referred to as the
emergence stage. For the perceived stage to arise, it may have to be triggered
by an event. It is at this point that conflict is said to have arisen.

1–13
 Pondy Five Stages Model of Conflict
The Felt Stage: This is the stress and anxiety stage. At this stage the conflict is
no longer merely perceived but is being felt by both or either of the conflicting
parties. Under this stage, upon the discoveries, the conflict begins to escalate.
The parties here begin to analyze the conflicting areas, their extent and impact
on both sides. The parties begin to perceive each other as rivals, the issue begins
to expand and the parties begin to adjust their position while their relationship
begins to get affected.

The Manifest Stage: Under this stage, the conflict between the parties becomes
evident. They begin to make obvious adjustments and confrontations as
motivated and directed by the nature of the existing conflict. At this stage, the
conflict is not longer being reserved by the parties for themselves alone; they
rather begin to act and extend their disagreement to the other party. This is the
stage at which conflict wears its full garb.

1–14
 Pondy Five Stages Model of Conflict
The Aftermath Stage: This is the general outcome stage of the conflict. At this
stage, the conflict deescalates. Parties may begin to consider resolution and
take the necessary steps towards its actualization; otherwise, the conflict may
have to attain dissolution. The outcome of the conflict may either be dissolution
or resolution.

1–15
 Prisoner’s Dilemma
A prisoner’s dilemma is a decision-making and game theory paradox illustrating
that two rational individuals making decisions in their own self-interest cannot
result in an optimal solution. The paradox was developed by mathematicians M.
Flood and M. Dresher in 1950, and the modern interpretation was conceptualized
by Canadian mathematician A.W. Tucker.

The prisoner’s dilemma may be expressed as an approach where individual

parties seek their welfare at the expense of the other party. Generally, since
both participants avoid cooperation in the decision-making process, they end up
in a much worse condition.

In the prisoner’s dilemma theory, it is the responsibility of the two parties to

choose whether to collaborate or not. Either party is given the chance to defect,
despite the option of the other party. The outcomes of the prisoner’s dilemma
are either beneficial or injurious to society. Making better economic choices
require cooperation between individuals. 1–16
 Prisoner’s Dilemma
Imagine that the police arrested two
suspects of a crime. Both suspects are
held in different cells and they cannot
communicate with each other. The
police officer offers both suspects the
opportunity to either remain silent or
blame another suspect. If both
suspects remain silent, they both will
serve only one year in prison. If they
both blame each other, they both will
serve three years in prison.

If one of the suspects blames another

and the other remains silent, the
suspect who remained silent would
serve five years in prison, while
another suspect would be set free.
The table below shows the possible
payoffs:

1–17
 Prisoner’s Dilemma
In such a setting, both suspects do not know the decision chosen by another
suspect. Therefore, the most rational decision from the perspective of self-
interest is to blame the other suspect.

For example, suspect A is afraid of remaining silent because in such a case, he

can receive five years in prison if suspect B blames him. If suspect A chooses to
blame suspect B, he can be set free if suspect B remains silent. However, that is
not likely, because suspect B is using the same rationale and he is also going to
blame suspect A.

Although the decision of remaining silent by both suspects provides the more
optimal payoff, it is not a rational option because both parties behave in their
self-interest. On the other hand, the decision of blaming another suspect is a
rational decision from that perspective and it provides Nash equilibrium despite
the worse payoff.
1–18
 Prisoner’s Dilemma
In such a setting, both suspects do not know the decision chosen by another
suspect. Therefore, the most rational decision from the perspective of self-
interest is to blame the other suspect.

For example, suspect A is afraid of remaining silent because in such a case, he

can receive five years in prison if suspect B blames him. If suspect A chooses to
blame suspect B, he can be set free if suspect B remains silent. However, that is
not likely, because suspect B is using the same rationale and he is also going to
blame suspect A.

Although the decision of remaining silent by both suspects provides the more
optimal payoff, it is not a rational option because both parties behave in their
self-interest. On the other hand, the decision of blaming another suspect is a
rational decision from that perspective and it provides Nash equilibrium despite
the worse payoff.
1–19
 Causes of Intrapersonal Conflict
Internal causes rooted in the inconsistency of the personality psyche:

 Contradiction between need and social norm;

 Contradiction of social statuses and roles;
 Contradiction of social norms and values;
 Contradiction of motives of interests and needs.

External causes, due to the position of the individual in the social group:

 Physical barriers that prevent the satisfaction of needs;

 Physiological restrictions that prevent the satisfaction of needs;
 The absence of an object necessary to satisfy the need;
 Social conditions that impede the satisfaction of needs.

1–20
 Types of Intrapersonal Conflict
An approach-approach is a conflict in which a person is attracted to two
desirable goals that both has positive outcomes but cannot pursue both. In this
situation the person can only choose one. As a simple example, imagine choosing
an item from a dessert menu and being torn between the chocolate brownie
sundae and the strawberry cheesecake. You want only one dessert but are
equally attracted to each of these items. Therefore, you have an approach
conflict in which you must choose between two attractive goals.

An approach-avoidance conflict is a situation in which a person is both

attracted to and repelled by the same goal. In this sort of conflict, a person
must decide whether to do something that had both positive and negative
outcomes. For example, being offered a good job in a bad location.
Looking also at the preceding example, you could have an approach-avoidance
conflict if you were on a diet yet wanted a dessert.

1–21
 Types of Intrapersonal Conflict
An avoidance-avoidance conflict is a situation of dilemma in which a person is
faced with two equally undesirable alternatives, and they both present negative
outcomes.

To illustrate this type of conflict, let’s change our dessert example slightly.
Imagine that you are invited to your boss’s home for dinner. After dinner,
strawberry cheesecake is served, but you are on a diet and trying to meet your
goal of no desserts.

In this situation, you have to choose between two undesirable alternatives. You
can refuse the dessert, which may be perceived as rude by your boss, or you can
eat the dessert and break your diet.

1–22
 Understanding Role and Role Conflict
Role: A role is a set of connected behaviors, rights, obligations, beliefs,
and norms as conceptualized by people in a social situation. It is an expected or
free or continuously changing behavior and may have a given individual social
status or social position.

Role Identity: A “role identity” is defined as the character and role an individual
devises for him or herself as an occupant of a particular social position, or the
imaginative view of oneself as being and acting as an occupant of that position
(McCall and Simmons 1978, p. 65).

Role Perception: Role perception refers to how we perceive that we need to

act in the role that we are “playing” at the time, either in a workplace or a
personal environment. For example, if you were a manager in the accounting
and finance area, you might see the role of that manager as being conservative,
considered, and analytical.
1–23
 Understanding Role and Role Conflict
Role expectation: The way a role ought to be performed as determined by
a group or society. For example, A university student is expected to complete
assignments on time and come to class prepared.

Role Conflict: Role conflict occurs when there are incompatible demands
placed upon a person relating to their job or position. People experience role
conflict when they find themselves pulled in various directions as they try to
respond to the many statuses they hold.

Role Ambiguity: Role ambiguity is a confusing situation that emerges because of

a vague job description where responsibilities and boundaries are not clearly
defined. It is a circumstance where an individual doesn’t understand adequately
what his job actually is.

1–24
 Consequences of Role Conflict
• Overall job dissatisfaction
• Dissatisfaction with work tasks
• Dissatisfaction with supervision
• Dissatisfaction with coworkers
• Dissatisfaction with pay
• Dissatisfaction with promotional opportunities
• Low organizational commitment
• Low job involvement
• Turnover intention
• Poor job performance

1–25
 Managing of Intrapersonal Conflict
Follow your values: Determine how the conflict affects your core values and
what matters to your productivity in the workplace. Consider solutions that align
with your beliefs and motivations.

Check your company policy: If applicable, review the company policies that
relate to the conflict. Follow any procedures already in place, or reach out to a
supervisor for guidance.

Write the conflict down: Review the pros and cons related to your conflict and
anticipate the outcomes of the optional decisions. Consider selecting the
resolution that has the most pros or better outcomes.

Be conscious of time: Keep in mind how much time you have to reach a solution.
Consider setting a deadline to ensure the conflict is resolved promptly.

1–26
1–27