Conflict Management

Conflict frequently arises in the workplace. Goal incompatibility between groups or individuals, differentiation, task interdependence, scarce resources, ambiguity, and communication problems can all lead to a situation that promotes conflict. There are a number of conflict management styles that can be used to effectively resolve such conflicts: competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating. However, although each individual has his/her own preferred conflict management style, not every style is optimally effective in every conflict situation. To maximize the effectiveness of conflict management efforts, management and parties to the conflict need to be aware of their short- and long-term goals and strategies for both the task and the people involved, their personal involvement and emotions in the conflict, their personal conflict management style, and which styles work best in which situations.

It often seems as if whenever two or more parties attempt to work together there are at least three opinions. Although sometimes this situation can lead to synergy and a more creative final product, in many cases it leads to conflict. Although the most common view of conflict is that it is by its very nature dysfunctional and needs to be resolved, in many cases -- if it is properly managed -- it can be both functional and help the conflicting parties work together better or to produce a better product than if the conflict had not arisen in the first place. Conflict between groups may also improve team dynamics, cohesiveness, and task orientation. However, if the conflict becomes too emotionally charged, a win-lose mentality can arise, with negative results such as groupthink, frustration, job dissatisfaction, and stress.

Very few people have the option to work in complete isolation of others. Even those who telecommute or work independently frequently find themselves in a position in which they need to interact with others: clients, suppliers, editors, etc. In virtually any situation in which there is more than one party with interests in the outcome, conflicts are likely to arise. In this context, conflict refers to any situation "in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by" the interests or actions of another party (McShane & Von Glinow, 2003). Conflict can manifest in any number of ways ranging from a mild disagreement between individuals to an all-out war between nations.

In the workplace, conflict typically begins with a situation that is conducive to conflict, such as the need to share a single piece of equipment or other scarce resource. For example, Group A needs the copier to reproduce a proposal for a tight deadline for a potential client and Group B needs to use the copier to produce a deliverable to an equally tight -- and incompatible -- deadline for a current client. As the parties come to believe that conflict exists, the situation usually next manifests itself in actions that outwardly demonstrate that an underlying conflict exists (e.g., a member of Group A tries to monopolize the copier so that it cannot be used by Group B). Conflict need not lead to a dysfunctional workplace, however. Through appropriate conflict management techniques -- either actions taken by one or more parties to the conflict or by an objective outside party in the attempt to de-escalate the conflict -- the severity and form of the conflict can be altered to maximize its benefits and minimize its negative consequences of the situation.

Types of Workplace Conflict Goal Incompatibility & Differentiation

As shown in Figure 1, conflict can arise from any one or more general sources in the workplace (McShane & Von Glinow, 2003). First, conflict can arise in the workplace due to incompatible goals between individuals or groups. For example, if two individuals are competing for the same promotion, it is likely that conflict will arise unless more than one position is available. Goal incompatibility becomes an even stronger source for potential conflict in situations in which there are financial rewards for achieving one's goals since, in such situations, employees tend to be more motivated to achieve their own goals at the expense of others. A second source of conflict in organizations is differentiation. This occurs when individuals or groups of employees hold divergent beliefs and attitudes as a result of their different backgrounds, experiences, or training. For example, differentiation often leads to conflict situations following business mergers and acquisitions. In such situations, the cultures, practices, and shared experiences of the formerly separate entities lead to an "us-them" situation.

Interdependence

A third source of potential conflict in organizations is task interdependence. This is the degree to which individuals or groups must share common inputs, interact during the course of performing their separate tasks, or receive outcomes that are partly determined by the mutual performance of both parties. There are three basic types of task independence:

• Pooled interdependence,
• Sequential interdependence, and
• Reciprocal interdependence

The lowest level of interdependence is pooled interdependence. Under this condition, individuals or teams work independently of each other except for their common reliance on a resource or authority. An example of pooled interdependence is the common reliance on a single copy machine, cited above. Sequential interdependence is a situation in which the output of one person or group becomes the direct input for another person or group. This situation frequently arises in assembly-line situations where the output of one process becomes the input to another process (McShane & Von Glinow, 2003). For example, the packing department cannot complete its task unless the department that makes the boxes or packing materials first completes its task. The third type of interdependence in organizations is reciprocal interdependence. This is the highest level of interdependence and occurs in situations in which work outputs are exchanged back and forth among individuals or groups. An example of this type of interdependence would be the relationship between bus drivers and maintenance crews. The drivers cannot drive the buses unless the maintenance crews maintain them, and the maintenance crews cannot maintain the buses unless the drivers bring them into the depot.

Scarce Resources, Ambiguity, Communication

A fourth type of situation that can lead to conflict in the workplace occurs when there are scarce resources. For example, if multiple technicians need the same laboratory equipment and there is insufficient equipment for each to have his or her own, conflict is likely to arise. Ambiguity in the workplace can also lead to conflict because such a situation increases the risk that one party may interfere with the achievement of the other party's goals. Situations of ambiguity in the workplace often lead to increased office politics. Another problem that can lead to conflict in the workplace is the lack of opportunity, ability, or motivation to communicate effectively. When effective communication does not exist, the likelihood that stereotypes will develop and conflict escalates. Good communication skills are necessary in order to communicate with other parties in a diplomatic, nonconfrontational manner. The lack of necessary skills for diplomatic communication can escalate a conflict situation and result in less motivation for effective communication in the future. Lack of communication skills is a common problem that occurs in cross-cultural conflicts.

Applications

Resolving Conflict

As shown in Figure 2, there are a number of ways to deal with conflict (Ruble & Thomas, 1976). Although sometimes it is assumed that there is only one best way to manage conflict, research has show that one conflict management style is best modified to fit the needs of the specific situation. These approaches to conflict management vary on the degree the party is cooperative -- or motivated to satisfy the interests of the other party in the conflict (e.g., allow the other group to use the copier) -- and assertive -- or motivated to satisfy its own interests (e.g., make sure that it is able to use the copier whenever it needs it).

Collaboration

In collaboration, the parties attempt to resolve their conflict by finding a mutually beneficial solution through problem solving. Collaborative solutions are high in both cooperativeness and assertiveness. In the collaborative style of conflict management, information is shared among the parties to the conflict so that all parties can help identify solutions that will potentially satisfy the needs or interests of all parties. Collaboration is the preferred method for conflict management when the parties do not have perfectly opposing interests and when there is sufficient trust and openness between the parties so that information can be shared.

Avoidance

On the opposite side of the conflict management style grid is avoidance, an approach that is low in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. Avoidance is an approach to conflict management in which the parties attempt to manage their differences by smoothing them over or avoiding or minimizing the situations in which conflict might arise. Although avoidance is not a functional long-term solution to conflict situations, it can be useful in the short-term as a way to temporarily cool down heated disputes or for situations where the issue causing conflict is trivial. For example, sometimes it is better to leave the room and cool off rather than to continue to unproductively try to resolve conflict. In such situations, avoidance can not only prevent a conflict situation from escalating, but may actually help it de-escalate.

Competition

A third approach to conflict management is competition. In this approach to conflict management, one party attempts to "win" at the other party's expense. Competition tends to be a win-lose situation characterized by high assertiveness and low cooperativeness. The underlying assumption in such an approach is that there is a fixed pool of resources from which to draw (e.g., hours during which the copier can be used) and that a gain on one side means a loss on the other side. Competitive solutions to conflict situations can be appropriate if the party knows that its solution is correct and a quick solution is needed or where the other party would take advantage of a more cooperative approach.

Accommodation

On the opposite side of the grid is the accommodation style of conflict management, which is low on assertiveness and high on cooperativeness. In this approach, one party completely gives in to the position of the party or acts with little or no attention to its own interests. Accommodation can be a functional conflict management approach if the opposing party has substantially more power or if the issue is not as important to the first party as it is to the opposing party.

Compromise

Finally, compromise is an approach to conflict management in which one party attempts to reach a middle ground with the opposing party. Compromise positions tend to have moderate levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness. When attempting to compromise, parties typically look for solutions in which losses are offset by equally valued gains. Compromise tends to work best in situations in which there is little possibility of mutual gain through problem solving, both parties have equal power, and there are time pressures to settle the conflict (Ruble & Thomas, 1976).

Issue

Adapting Styles for Optimal Outcome

Although most people have a preferred conflict management style, it can be useful to apply a different approach to managing conflict to better meet the needs of each situation. Shetach (2009) expanded on the two-dimensional model of interpersonal conflict management styles and developed a four dimensions model (see Figure 3). The model considers four critical factors that need to be taken into account in managerial attempts to increase the effectiveness of their conflict management skills:

1. "Northern star,"
2. "Conflict evolvement map,"
3. Awareness of available response options (see Figure 2), and
4. Awareness of one's preferred personal conflict management style from among these options.

"Northern star" is Shetach's metaphor for strategy or long-term goal. This term is used to articulate that a manager must be aware of both the main goal for communication in the current situation as well as the long-term, future objectives regarding the working relationship. By being aware of both the task at hand and the people involved, Shetach posits that it is possible to increase the likelihood that conflict can be constructively managed in order not only to meet a specific goal, but also to better manage the situation to advance one's long-term strategy. Further, by defining clear goals both for the task at hand and the people involved in the situation, one can better prioritize the variables, leading to a more constructive outcome. In addition to understanding the desired outcome for the situation, the four dimensions model also aims to help managers recognize their level of personal involvement in the conflict as well as any emotional responses so that these may be controlled and the conflict management approach be kept on a professional, not personal, level.

The four dimensions model also takes into account the various conflict management strategies discussed above and shown in Figure 2. Effective conflict management is often situational, and a manager needs to be aware of what options are available for resolving issues. In addition, it is helpful to know one's preferred personal conflict management style from among the five available options. Each approach to conflict management can lead to either a constructive or destructive conclusion, depending on the specifics of the situation. In order to maximize the effectiveness of conflict management efforts and help arrive at a win-win resolution, managers and others involved in conflict situations need to be aware of the specifics of the situation and their own personal styles, and be flexible enough to change their preferred style in order to resolve the conflict.

Conclusion

Wherever two or more people need to work together, share resources, or compete for scarce rewards, conflict is almost ensured to arise. There are a number of ways to deal with conflict, varying from concern about one's own needs to concern about the needs of the other party. Frequently, the desired outcome is a win-win situation in which the interests of both parties are met. However, depending on the circumstances, the best approach to conflict management will strive for a different outcome. No matter the approach used, however, it is important to realize that conflict situations can easily become personalized, and the original source of conflict forgotten, remaining unresolved. To avoid this possibility, it is important not only to know the various conflict management options available and where they are best applied, but also to be aware of personal emotions and involvement, as well as short-term and long-term goals in resolving the conflict.

Terms & Concepts

Accommodation: An approach to conflict management in which one party completely gives in to the position of the other party or acts with little or no attention to its own interests. Accommodation can be a functional conflict management approach if the opposing party has substantially more power or if the issue is not as important to the first party as it is to the opposing party.

Assertiveness: In conflict management, the motivation to satisfy one's own interests (cf. cooperativeness).

Avoidance: An approach to conflict management in which the parties attempt to manage their differences by smoothing them over or avoiding or minimizing the situations in which conflict might arise. Although avoidance is not a functional long-term solution to conflict situations, it can be useful in the short-term as a way to temporarily cool down heated disputes or for situations where the issue causing conflict is trivial. Avoidance approaches are low in both assertiveness and cooperativeness.

Collaboration: A conflict management style in which the parties attempt to resolve their conflict by finding a mutually beneficial solution through problem solving. Collaborative solutions are high in both cooperativeness and assertiveness. Collaboration is the preferred method for conflict management when the parties do not have perfectly opposing interests and when there is sufficient trust and openness between the parties so that information can be shared.

Competition: An approach to conflict management in which one party attempts to "win" at the other party's expense. Competition tends to be a win-lose situation with high assertiveness and low cooperativeness. Competitive solutions to conflict situations can be appropriate if the party knows that its solution is correct and a quick solution is needed or where the other party would take advantage of a more cooperative approach.

Compromise: An approach to conflict management in which one party attempts to reach a middle ground with the opposing party. Compromise positions tend to have moderate levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness. When attempting to compromise, parties typically look for solutions in which losses are offset by equally valued gains. Compromise tends to work best in situations in which there is little possibility of mutual gain through problem solving, both parties have equal power, and there are time pressures to settle the conflict.

Conflict: A situation in which one party believes that its interests are negatively affected by another party (McShane & Von Glinow, 2003).

Conflict Management: The process of altering the severity and form of conflict in order to maximize its benefits and minimize its negative consequences. Between parties, conflict can be resolved through collaboration, accommodation, competition, compromise, or avoidance. Conflict management can also refer to interventions performed by an objective outside party in the attempt to de-escalate conflict between two or more parties.

Cooperativeness: In conflict management, the motivation to satisfy the interests of the other party (cf. assertiveness).

Groupthink: The tendency to have the same opinion as the other members of the group as a way to avoid conflict, reduce interpersonal pressure, or maintain an illusion of unity or cohesiveness without thoroughly thinking through the problem. Groupthink interferes with effective decision making.

Synergy: The process by which the combined product resulting from the work of a team of individuals is greater than the results of their individual efforts.

Task Interdependence: "The degree to which team members must share common inputs, interact in the process of executing their work, and receive outcomes determined partly by their mutual performance" (McShane & Von Glinow, 2003).

Win-Lose Orientation: The belief in a conflict situation that there is a fixed pool of resources that are to be divided among all parties so that the more one side receives, the less the other side receives.

Win-Win Orientation: The belief in a conflict situation that it is possible to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution for all parties.

Bibliography

Carlson, J. (2013). Rock-paper scissors: Strategies in conflict situations. Baylor Business Review,31(2), 48-49. Retrieved November 27, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=86952171

Coleman, P. T., & Kugler, K. G. (2014). Tracking managerial conflict adaptivity: Introducing a dynamic measure of adaptive conflict management in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(7), 945–68. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=98352669

McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2003). Organizational behavior (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Ruble, T. L., & Thomas, K. W. (1976). Support for a two-dimensional model of conflict behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(1), 143-155.

Sadri, G. (2013). Choosing conflict resolution by culture. Industrial Management, 55(5), 10-15. Retrieved November 27, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=90447258

Saeed, T., et al. (2014). Leadership styles: Relationship with conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 25(3), 214–25. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=99126040

Sinha, A. (2011). Conflict management: Making life easier. IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 5(4), 31-42. Retrieved November 27, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=78153520

Shetach, A. (2009). The four-dimension model: A tool for effective conflict management. International Studies of Management and Organization, 39(3), 82-106. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=44505816&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Atteya, N. (2012). The conflict management grid: A selection and development tool to resolve the conflict between the marketing and sales organizations. International Journal of Business & Management, 7(13), 28-39. Retrieved November 27, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=77935209

Busby, D. M., & Holman, T. B. (2009, December). Perceived match or mismatch on the Gottman conflict styles: Associations with relationship outcome variables. Family Process, 48(4), 531-545. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=45393409&site=ehost-live

Ergeneli, A., Camgoz, S. M., & Karapinar, P. B. (2010). The relationship between self-efficacy and conflict-handling styles in terms of relative authority positions of the two parties. Social Behavior and Personality, 38(1), 13-28. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=48096582&site=ehost-live

Eunson, B. (2012). Conflict management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved November 27, 2013 from EBSCO online database eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=451596&site=ehost-live

Furumo, K. (2009). The impact of conflict and conflict management style on deadbeats and deserters in virtual teams. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 49(4), 66-73. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=43278847&site=ehost-live

Godse, A. S., & Thingujam, N. S. (2010). Perceived emotional intelligence and conflict resolution styles among information technology professionals: Testing the mediating role of personality. Singapore Management Review, 32(1), 69-83. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=45566340&site=ehost-live

Liberman, E., Levy, Y. F., & Segal, P. (2009). Designing and internal organizational system for conflict management. Dispute Resolution Journal, 64(2), 62-74. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=43582432&site=ehost-live

Salami, S. O. (2010). Conflict resolution strategies and organizational citizenship behavior: The moderating role of trait emotional intelligence. Social Behavior and Personality, 38(1), 75-86. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=48096588&site=ehost-live

Somech, A., Desivilya, H. S., & Lidogoster, H. (2009). Team conflict management and team effectiveness: The effects of task interdependence and team identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(3), 359-378. Retrieved April 27, 2010 from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?d irect=true&db=bth&AN=36868134&site=ehost-live

Way, K. A., Jimmieson, N. L., & Bordia, P. (2014). Supervisor conflict management, justice, and strain: Multilevel relationships. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(8), 1044–63. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=99047371