CHAPTER FIVE

5. MANAGEMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT

5.1. Meaning of conflict
- Conflict is the process that begins when one party perceives that another party has
negatively affected, or is about to negatively affects, something that the first party cares
about.
- Conflict is the process in which an effort is purposely made by A to offset the effort of B
by some form of blocking that will result in frustrating B in attaining his or her goals or
furthering his or interest.

The following are some of the defining elements of conflict:

Conflict must be perceived by the parties to it: whether conflict exists or not is a
perception issue. If no one is aware of a conflict, it is generally agreed that no conflict exists.
 Opposition, scarcity, and blockage: The assumptions that there are two or more parties
whose interest or goal appear to be incompatible. Resources are not unlimited, and their
scarcity encourages blocking behavior. The parties are therefore in opposition.

In an organization, conflicts can occur on several levels- on an intrapersonal level, in which an

individual’s own goals, values and perceptions are incompatible. Individuals also experience
conflict with one another – interpersonal conflict. Finally, conflicts arise among groups – inter
group conflict.
Features of conflict
- Conflict occurs when two or more parties pursue mutually exclusive goals, values or
events
- Conflict arises out of two perceptions
- Conflict refers to deliberate behavior
- Conflict can exist either at the latent or overt level, but generally speaking conflict is a
term that is limited to over facts.
- Conflict is different from competition. In conflict one said sees an opportunity to acquire
resources/ perform activities.
- In competition both sides try to win, but neither side actively interferes with the other.

1
 Consequences of Conflict
Positive consequences of conflict
- It is major stimulant for change
- Group think is avoided
- It fosters creativity and innovation
- Cohesion and satisfaction
- A minimum level of conflict is optimal
- It also helps individuals in reducing accumulated ill-feelings and tensions between them
- A good fight clears the air.
Negative conflicts
- It creates stress in people: it extracts its fall on the physical and mental health of the
combatants. An intense conflict generates feelings of anxiety, guilty, frustrations and
hostility.
- Diversion of energy: this is one of the most dead full consequences of conflict is the
diversion of the groups’ time and effort toward winning the conflict rather than toward
achieving organizational goals.
- Instability and chaos: under intense conflicts collaboration across individuals, groups and
departments decreases or vanishes.
5.2. CATEGORIES OF CONFLICT
It is entirely appropriate to say that there has been “conflict” over the role of conflict must be
avoided – that it indicates a malfunctioning within the group. We call this the Traditional View.
Another school of thought, The Human Relational View, argues that conflict is a natural and
inevitable outcome in any group and that it need not be evil, but rather has the potential to be a
positive force in determining group performance. The third and most recent perspective proposes
not only that conflict can be a positive forcing in a group but explicitly argues that some conflict
is absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively. We label this third school the
Interactionist Approach.

Organizational Conflict - Two Views: The Bad, the Good (Functional Versus Dysfunctional
Conflict). There are two ways of looking at organizational conflict. Each of these ways is linked
to a different set of assumptions about the purpose and function of organizations.

2
The Bad: - The dysfunctional view of organizational conflict is imbedded in the notion that
organizations are created to achieve goals by creating structures that perfectly define job
responsibilities, authorities, and other job functions. Like a clockwork watch, each "cog" knows
where it fits, knows what it must do and knows how it relates to other parts. This traditional
view of organizations values orderliness, stability and the repression of any conflict that occurs.
Using the timepiece analogy we can see the sense in this. What would happen to time-telling if
the gears in our traditional watches decided to become less traditional, and re-define their roles in
the system?

To the "traditional" organizational thinker, conflict implies that the organization is not designed
or structured correctly or adequately. Common remedies would be to further elaborate
job descriptions, authorities and responsibilities, increase the use of central power (discipline),
separate conflicting members, etc.

This view of organizations and conflict causes problems. Unfortunately, most of us, consciously
or unconsciously, value some of the characteristics of this "orderly" environment. Problems arise
when we do not realize that this way of looking at organizations and conflict only fits
organizations that work in routine ways where innovation and change are virtually eliminated.
Virtually all government organizations work within a very disorderly context -- one
characterized by constant change and a need for constant adaptation. Trying to "structure away"
conflict and disagreement in a dynamic environment requires tremendous amounts of energy,
and will also suppress any positive outcomes that may come from disagreement, such as
improved decision-making and innovation.

The Good

The functional view of organizational conflict sees conflict as a productive force, one that can
stimulate members of the organization to increase their knowledge and skills, and their
contribution to organizational innovation and productivity. Unlike the position mentioned above,
this more modern approach considers that the keys to organization success lie not in structure,
clarity and orderliness, but in creativity, responsiveness and adaptability. The successful

3
organization, then, needs conflict so that diverging views can be put on the table, and new ways
of doing things can be created.

The functional view of conflict also suggests that conflict provides people with feedback about
how things are going. Even "personality conflicts" carry information to the manager about what
is not working in an organization, affording the opportunity to improve.

If you subscribe to a flexible vision of effective organizations, and recognize that each conflict
situation provides opportunity to improve, you then shift your view of conflict. Rather
than trying to eliminate conflict, or suppress its symptoms, your task becomes managing conflict
so that it enhances people and organizations, rather than destroying people and organizations.

Generally, Functional conflict- is conflicts that supports the goals of the group and improves its
performance. Dysfunctional conflict – is a conflict that hinders group performance.

5.3. CAUSE OF CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATION

1. Communication
The communicative source represents those opposing forces that arise from semantic difficulties,
misunderstanding, and “noise” in the communication channels. Poor communication is certainly
not the source of all conflicts, though there is considerable evidence to suggest that problems in
the communication process acts to retard collaboration and stimulate misunderstanding.

A review of the research suggests that semantic difficulties, insufficient exchange of information,
and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to communication and potential
antecedent conditions to conflict.

2. Coordination of work
Probably the most common source of inter group conflict is the coordination of work among
several different departments. That is, organizations need coordination among several
departments’ activities to manufacture products or give services, and friction often arises in the
process. Essentially, the conflict arises from the interdependence of the tasks of the units in the
organizations.

4
Task interdependence refers to the amount of reliance a work group has to put on another
organizational unit to complete its projects. Generally, there are three kinds of task
interdependence. These are:
→ Sequential task interdependence
→ Reciprocal task interdependence and
→ pooled task interdependence
Sequential task interdependence
This kind of interdependence requires one group to complete its task before another group can
complete its tasks. That is the product (output) of one group is the raw material (input) of another
group. Poor performance by the first group can make the second group perform poorly, so
conflicts between the groups can be intense. Good planning can prevent such conflicts.

Reciprocal task interdependence

In this kind of task interdependence, some out puts of each group become inputs of the other
group. The close the links among the groups provide many areas for potential conflicts.

Pooled task interdependence

Pooled interdependence requires no interaction among groups because each group performs
separately. However, the pooled performances of the entire group determine how successful the
organization is. Relatively little conflict tends to surface. Organization can coordinate group
efforts through standard policies and procedures.

3. Difference in terms of goals

Groups within organizations have diverse goals. For example, purchasing is concerned with the
timely acquisition of inputs at lower prices, marketing’s goals concentrate on disposing of out
puts and increasing revenues , quality control’s attention is focused on improving quality and
ensuring that the organization’s product meet the standards and production units seek efficiency
of operations by maintaining a steady production flow. This diversity of goals among groups is a
major source of conflict.

5
 4. Organizational reward system
The way in which an organization monitors group performance and distributes resources
(example- money, personnel, and equipment) is another major source of intergroup conflict.
Groups come into conflict as they compete for scarce resources. Causes related to reward system
may include: resource interdependence, conflicting rewarding system, and competition as a
motivational strategy.

5. Resource inter dependence

Frequently, groups are relatively independent of each other in getting their work done but
compete with each other for resources. Two separate manufacturing plants making the same
product may compete for additional budget allocations or additional personnel corporate
headquarters.

6. Conflicting reward system

Reward systems are found to create conflict when one member’s gain in at other’s expense.

Types of Conflict
I) Individual level conflicts : inter-individual and intra-individual conflicts
II) Group level conflicts: inter group and intra group conflicts
III) Organizational level conflicts; inter organizational and intra organizational level
conflicts
I. Individual level conflicts
A) Intra individual conflicts: this is internal to the persons and it is probably the
most difficult type of conflict to analyze. Human beings are goal directed. Need
satisfaction spars people on, non-satisfaction of needs frustrates people and leads
to behavior that negatively affects job performance. Organizations are basically
formed for the purpose of meeting humanistic and economic needs of individuals.
Basically, intra-personal conflicts can be related to two things; conflicts arising
due to divergent goals or conflict arising from out of multiple roles to be played
daily.

6
 Goal conflicts occur when a goal that an individual is attempting to achieve has
either positive or negative features or when two or more competing goal exists.
There are three separate types of goal conflicts are identified
- Approach –Approach goal conflicts: here a person wants two positive situations but can
have only one. The person might be torn between lucrative jobs (mutually exclusive
goals)
- Approach – Avoidance conflict; in this case the person attempts to achieve a goal that has
both positive and negative aspects.
- Avoidance –Avoidance conflict; this type of conflict can be easily resolved because a
person faced with two negative goals may not chose either of them and may simply leave
the situation. This may also exist when the person does not have the opportunity to leave.
For example, a worker may dislike his present job, but the alternative of learning and
looking for another job may be even less attractive.
2. Role:
It is a set of expectations people have about the behavior of a person in a position. It is an
expected mode of behavior. An individual occupies many different positions in a variety of
organizations and performs multiple roles. When we examine the concept of role 3 types of roles
clearly emerge;
- Expected role: is what other people expect from an individual.
- Perceived role: is how the individual thinks he/she should behave to fulfill the
expected role
- Actual/Enacted role: is the way the person actually behaves in an organization.

3. Role conflict:
It is the result of divergent role expectations. It exists when the expectations of a job are mutually
different or opposite and the individual cannot meet one expectation without rejecting the other.
B) Interpersonal Conflicts
It involves two or more individuals rather than one individual. Such conflict situations are made
up of at least two individuals who hold polarized point of view, who are somewhat intolerant of
ambiguities, who ignore delicate shades of grey and who are quick to jump to conclusions.
Reasons of interpersonal conflict
- Difference in personality differences

7
 - Difference in perception
- Clashes of values and interest
- Power and status differences, status inconsistency lead to conflict.
- Scarce resources; conflicts over scarce resources are exceedingly common in
organizations.

II) GROUP LEVEL CONFLICTS

A. Intergroup conflict: are conflicts over authority, jurisdictions and resources are
exceedingly common. Every group is in at least partial conflict with every other group it
interacts with. Most of the departments in the organization compete for the allocation of
scares resources and power, they differ in goals, work activities power and prestige.
Sources of intergroup conflicts
- Incompatible goals
- Task interdependence: refers to the dependence of one unit on another for reasons
on another for resources or information.
- Resource allocation
- Competitive incentive and reward system
- Line and staff conflicts: today line and staff differences are the most common
type of intergroup conflict. This conflict is basically a clash of domains caused by
dividing expertise, authority and roles. Sources of line and staff conflicts by
Daltons
1. Line managers dislike taking advice from younger staff specialists. They
fear being ‘shown up’
2. Line managers label ‘staff’ as agents on trial. The staff in turn views
himself as an expert
3. Line managers feel that staff oversteps its authority
4. Line people resent staff’s highly academic and untested ideas.
5. Staff people feels that like managers are bull headed and do not cloth staff
with enough authority and resist new ideas
- Difference in values and perceptions
- Other reasons it may include

8
 i. Heterogeneity in members –personality difference such as background,
education, age etc lower the probability of interpersonal rapport and
decreases the amount of collaboration b/n departments.
ii. Communication distortion
iii. Participative decision making – joint decision making promote conflict.
It offers enough scope for the expressions disputes and allows more
occasions for differences to develop higher interaction acts to strengthen
disagreements more than facilitate coordination and cooperation.
iv. Low Formalization: where formalization is low, the potential for
jurisdictional disputes increases conflicts between departments are likely
to flourish in situations where they are not subjected to rules and
regulations.

Consequences of Intergroup Conflicts

Groups experiencing conflicts react in fairly predictable ways. Changes which occur within the
groups
- Members show ‘we’ feelings
- Superiority complex develops
- Members indulge in mutual discrimination and shifting of blame
- Inferiority complex
- Low morale
- Member lose cohesions
Changes Which Take Place between the groups
- Negative sentiments/outlook/ against the rival group (enemy)
- We are ‘good’ they are ‘bad’ feelings
- More aggressive, over estimates its strengths and achievements
- More concerned for member needs and generally satisfied with itself
- Becomes a well-knit group
- Enemy’s win increases tension and conflicts
- Initially resists admitting defeat
- Search on for a convenient scapegoat
- Communication with winners breaks down

9
 - Disintegrate/fall apart/

III) ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL CONFLICTS

1) Intra-organizational conflicts: the well springs of conflicts in an organization are many.
But mainly three kinds of internal strains can be identified.
A) The horizontal strains: the competition between different functional subsystems. It refers
to conflict between employees or departments of the same hierarchical level in an
organization. The sources of conflict between departments consist of pressures toward
sub optimization.
B) The vertical strains: the competition between various levels in the hierarchy for power,
privilege/reward this conflict separates people in various levels of the occupational
ladders in organizations. It refers to any conflict between levels in an organization. It
occurs usually in superior-subordinate relations. C.G. Smith identifies 3 reasons for
vertical conflicts

i. Inadequate communication between levels

ii. Conflict arises essentially from differences of interests between position
holders occupying different status in the organizational hierarchy and;
iii. A distinct lack of shared perceptions and attitudes among members in various
levels.
C) Line and staff conflict – controversy and conflict are inherent in the concept of line and
staff. It is not an easy task to divide and distribute expertise, authority and roles in
equitable quantities between the line generalists and staff specialists. The concept
authorizes the splitting of various functions into two categories: Hierarchical and Non-
hierarchical-that is creation of low status and high status persons. These create
discrepancy between expected and actual authority leading to resentment and frustration
to all the parties involved.

The causes of line and staff conflict

From Line View Point

10
  Unauthorized encroachment – staff oversteps its authority; because line managers are
ultimately responsible for results and profits. They tend to resent staff encroachment
upon their duties and prerogatives/rights/privileges.

 Academic advice: - Staff does not give sound advice. The advice, staff offers, is not
fully considered, well balanced and soundly tested. Staffs specialists are, in many cases,
are cutoff from the day to day operational realities.
 Staff steals credit: but when things go wrong staff people turn the tables on line
officers.
 Staff fails to see the whole picture:- have a limited perspective and fail to relate their
ideas to the organization’s overall objectives. Staff is loyal to a narrow specialty; line is
loyal to the organization.
 Empire building tendencies: since specialists have fewer organizational levels to
advance to each frequently tries to expand his/her own ‘empire’.

From the staff viewpoint

 Line does not use staff properly: - the line manager prefers to run his own show.
Staffs’ help is sought as a last resort.
 Line resists new ideas: line management is often overly cautious /alert/ and painfully
low in accepting useful ideas.
 Line does not provide staff enough authority;- even the best solutions offered by staff
members quite often, are not supported and implemented by line managers.

2) Inter-organizational Conflict
These are much the same as those arising within an organization. The bases are essentially the
same as the bases of intergroup conflict. Most commonly cited reasons are incompatible
objectives, conflicts over status, prestige and money. Inter organizational conflict is more
extensive, more diffuse than the conflict among persons or groups.
A conflict with outside organizations serves four purposes
- Promoting closer bonds of unity among individuals within the organization
- Building new life in to organizational objectives and values

11
 - Making organizational members aware of the strategy and tactics of the antagonist.
- Acts as an agency of social control

Considerations to be fulfilled for conflict to exist between two organizations, the following
conditions must be satisfied.
i. Two organizations that are ignorant of each other cannot be in conflict through they
might be in competition.
ii. A decision on the part of either executive must affect the state of both organizations
in value-significant direction.
iii. A decision on the part of either executive must affect the image of the state of the
other in a direction that he considers as unfavorable.

Types of Inter-organizational Conflicts

1) Management –Government – conflicts over political contributions, bribery, anti-trust
actions, fair trade, consumer protection etc. the government will gradually monitor
organizational activities and management performance in areas where government
regulation of business is thought necessary.
2) Inter-Management:- Managements may compete against each other in ways that they
believe will enhance their position in the industry. Disputes over patents and fulfillment
of contracts price wars may be included here.
3) Inter-Union: unions may compete for members or jobs as in jurisdictional disputes.
4) Union –Government: the unions will be scrutinized by agents of government for illegal
activities like criminal activities, discrimination, illegal strikes etc.
5) Union -Management: if management and labor are to retain their institutional ideal ties,
they must disagree and must adopt appropriate roles. Conflict is essential to survival for
the union; lack of conflict would weaken it. Conflict between labor and management is
expressed in many forms like strikes, peaceful bargains, grievances, debates, loyalties,
sabotage and absenteeism.

Conflict Resolutions Structural Techniques

Conflict can sometimes be resolved/ prevented by designing an appropriate organization
structure. Some of the frequently employed techniques to resolve conflict:-

12
 1) Dominance through position;- the simplest conceivable conflict solution is elimination
of the other party to force opponents to free and give up the fight a slay them
2) Appeal procedures: a conventional method of resolving disputes in organization is for the
people in disagreement to ask a higher authority to help them arrive at a solution by
resolving the problem satisfactorily.
3) Liaison Groups/ Intermediaries/ Integrators; to a bit difference between two wining
factions a full time integrator can be appointed who can speak the languages of both the
parties.
4) Member Rotation: inter-organizational exchange activities help in reducing conflict.
Exchange of people between interdependent departments creates an atmosphere where
the new comer can exchange his views with others.
5) Reduce Interdependence: the potential for conflict is very great in situations where two
departments have to work in an interdependent fashion and share resources.
6) Super ordinate goals; it is a common goal that appeals to all the parties involved and
cannot be accomplished by the resources of any single party separately.
7) Identifying a common enemy

5.4. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUE

The following are the major strategies managers can use to deal with enter group conflict:
1. Ignoring the conflict
2. Imposing a solution
3. Smoothing
4. Appealing to super ordinate goals
5. Altering the human variable
6. Inter group problem solving
7. Altering the structural variable

1. IGNORING THE CONFLICT: Is characterized by absence of behavior: the executive

avoids dealing with the dysfunctional aspects of the conflict. He or she might refuse to listen
to attacks of one group on the other. Quite often, executives who utilize this strategy

13
 disregard the causes of the conflict, and as a result, the conflict situation frequently continues
or gets worse through time.
Appropriate situations: When the issue is trivial and when the issue is symptomatic of more
basic, pressing problems.

2. IMPOSING A SOLUTION: Means forcing the conflicting parties to accept a solution

devised by a higher –level manager. In effect, this strategy does not allow much conflict to
surface or offer much room for the participants to air their grievances. Like ignoring the
conflict, imposing a solution is generally an effective conflict resolution strategy. The peace
it achieves is frequently short- lived. The real issues don’t get addressed, and conflict
reappears under other in another situations. Appropriate situations
- When quick , decisive action is needed
- When unpopular decisions need to be made and consensus among the group appears
very unlikely.
3. SMOOTHING: A manager may choose to smooth over the conflict, playing down its
importance and magnitude. He or she might try to persuade the groups that they are not as far
apart in their differences, try to soften group members whose feelings have been hurt, or
downplay to the group the importance of the issue. Like forcing a solution, smoothing is
generally ineffective because it does not address the key point of the conflict , which are
likely to keep resurfacing. Appropriate situations:
- As a stop-gap measure to let people cool down and regain perspective.
- When the conflict is over non work issues

4. APPEALING TO SUPERORDINATE GOALS: This refers to creating a shared goal that

cannot be attained without the cooperation of each of the conflicting parties. The current
problem is made to seem insignificant beside these more important common goals. Finding
such super ordinate goal is not easy. The goal must be important to both groups . Attaining
the goal must require cooperation between groups. The rewards from obtaining the common
goal must be high. Appropriate situations
- When there is a mutually important goal that neither group can achieve without the
cooperation of the other.

14
 - When the survival or success of the overall organization is in jeopardy.

5. ALTERING THE HUMAN VARIABLE: Using behavioral change techniques such as

human relation training to alter attitudes and behaviors that cause conflict.

Integrative Problem Solving: - Face to face meeting of the conflicting parties for the purpose
of identifying the problem and resolving it through discussion.

6. ALTERING THE STRUCTURAL VARIABLE

A Changing the formal organization structure and the interaction patterns of conflicting
parties through job redesign, transfers, creation of coordinating positions, and the like.

INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLES

People respond to conflict in different ways. A person’s interpersonal style in conflict situations
can be described on two dimensions of behavior; cooperativeness and assertiveness.

- Cooperativeness is the desire to satisfy another party’s needs and concern’s

- Assertiveness is the desire to satisfy one’s own needs and concerns.

There are five interpersonal styles of conflict management that result from various combinations
of the two. Briefly stated, these styles involve the following behaviors:

i. Avoidance-being uncooperative and unassertive; downplaying disagreement,

withdrawing from the situation, and /or staying neutral at all costs. Lose-lose style.
ii. Accommodation or Smoothing-being cooperative but unassertive; letting others’
wishes rule; smoothing over differences to maintain superficial (apparent) harmony.
iii. Competition or authoritative command-being uncooperative but assertive; working
against the wishes of the other party, engaging in win-lose competition, or forcing
through the exercise of authority.

15
 iv. Compromise-being moderately cooperative and assertive but not to either extreme;
bargaining for “acceptable” solutions in which each party wins a bit and loses a bit.
Trade-offs style (lose sth to gain the other)
v. Collaboration or problem solving-being cooperative and assertive; trying to fully
satisfy everyone’s concerns by working through differences; finding and solving
problems so that everyone gains. Win-win style.

High

Accommodation or Smoothing Collaboration or Problem Solving

Degree of Compromise

Cooperativeness

Low Avoidance Competition or Authoritative Command

Low High

Degree of Assertiveness

16