CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATIONS

Group Report for DEM 733

Prepared by : Angelina Borican Christina Trinidad Gregorio Reyes Submitted to: Dr. Marietta P. Demelino 9/5/2009
1 |Page

PART I - Dynamics of organizational conflict

Reported by Angelina Borican

Nature of conflict in organization Any type of organization, be it a private business, a multinational company or an educational institution emphasizes the same organizational ideals such as COOPERATION, HARMONY and COLLABORATION. These are important elements in order to achieve the organizations objectives. CONFLICT on the other hand is pervasive in all human experience. Primarily because of the nature of human beings, owing to their individual differences, people that compose an organization, although they are bound together by a common organizational goal, more often than not run conflict against each other.

Definition of conflict There are divergent views on looking at conflict as an inherent element of an organizations life. In bureaucratic theory, conflict is evidence of breakdown in the organization; failure on the part of management to plan adequately or to exercise sufficient control. From the human relations view, conflict is seen in an especially negative light as evidence of failure to develop appropriate norms in the group. Nevertheless, both view conflict as something that is disruptive and something that is to be avoided. Managing conflict therefore is critical and can be approached from several perspectives using different frameworks contingency view, process view, structural view, open systems view.

How conflict differs from attacks

There is a distinct difference between ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT and its attendant HOSTILITY, on the one hand, and destructive ATTACKS, on the other hand. According to Kenneth Boulding, there are 2 types of hostility (1) MALEVOLENT hostility and (2) NONMALEVOLENT hostility. 2 |Page

MALEVOLENT hostility is aimed at hurting or worsening the position of another individual or group with scant regard for anything else, including consequences for the attacker. It is often characterized by the use of issues as the basis for attack which are in reality not important to the attacker except as a vehicle for damaging the opposition. NONMALEVOLENT hostility may well worsen the position of others but is acted out for the purpose of improving the position of the attacker. Malevolent hostility can give rise to NEFARIOUS ATTACKS which are characterized by o o o o o Focus on persons rather than on issues Use of hateful language Use of dogmatic statements rather than questions Maintenance of fixed views regardless of new information or argument Use of emotional terms

Hostility
Hostility occurs when conflict is badly managed which can lead to hate, retribution and antagonism. Oftentimes, organizational conflict occurs because of the following causes: (1) competition for scarce resources; (2) autonomy; (3) goal divergence

Different views on conflict

A Contingency View Because there are a number of causes of conflict, there is no one best way of managing it; situational or contingency framework emphasizes diagnosis and the assumption that it is self-defeating to adopt a universally applicable set of principles and guidelines for effecting change or managing conflict

A Process View of Conflict Conflict between two parties appears to unfold in a relatively orderly sequence of events and, unless something intervenes, the sequence tends to be repeated in episodes. Each episode is highly dynamic, with each partys behaviour serving as a stimulus to evoke a response from the other. Each new episode is shaped in part by previous episodes

A Structural View of Conflict Sees conflict in terms of the conditions that influence behaviour

3 |Page

Rules and regulations often serve to avoid or manage conflict by clarifying such issues as how to proceed, when and who has what responsibility Personality predispositions of people found in the organization Social norms of the organizations

o o

An Open-Systems View of Conflict Organizations are open systems i.e., they are interactive with their environments and much that goes on within them reflects changes in the external environment.

Basic Internal Conflicts The school as a complex organization, run up against four basic internal conflicts. These are: following policy vs. sensitivity to individual differences delegating authority vs. pursuing authorized goals process vs. product power vs. morale Dealing with these school conflicts is not merely a matter of more dedication or self-discipline on the part of individuals. Nor is it a matter of patience or forbearance or charisma. What must be addressed is the structure of relationships that constitute the organization. Following policy vs. sensitivity to individual differences A basic organizational conflict is that of following policy vs. sensitivity to individual differences. Robert K. Merton investigated how following policy reduces sensitivity to individual differences. This conflict, for example, is the basis of the persistent tension in trying to follow a school policy providing equal educational opportunity that also tries to address the individual needs of the child. Is consistency more desirable than the effectiveness of individualized treatment? This tension between policy and sensitivity can be seen in a variety of school problems and practices. For example, the conflict of teaching a class according to a standardized curriculum vs. making adjustments according to the readiness of individual students. restrictions, for fear of legal liability, on outside-of-school activities to enhance the curriculum
4 |Page

 the establishment of mathematical formulas for generating grades rather than relying on teacher judgment. the use of standardized tests for college admissions to supplement, sometimes replace, secondary school records and recommendations. Delegating authority vs. pursuing authorized goals Philip Selznick finds that as authority is delegated to them, organization members pursue their personal goals more strongly. Teachers have moral and professional goals and these not infrequently come in conflict with school procedures and policies. For example, a teacher may be put in charge of discipline and ignore a policy that requires students who fight to be suspended automatically. He or she may take into consideration, for example, that students who are bullied ought not to be punished along with the bullies. On the other hand, principals have neither time nor energy to check up on every detail of the school's functioning. A well-running school necessarily involves teachers in much of what the public would consider administrative work, e.g. rostering, discipline, trip planning, admissions. This puts teachers in the position of exercising discretion on matters of policy. They often then make decision on the basis of what they see as the merits of the case rather than on the basis of policies and procedures. The basic conflict between delegation of authority and the pursuit of authorized goals is a matter of the extent to which resources allotted for the public goals of the schools, e.g. instruction, are diverted to other uses. This is not a matter of dishonesty but a difference in perception of what is needed to carry out a task. School boards and citizen's committees tend to underestimate the resources needed -- from an educator's point of view -- to accomplish the goals they profess to esteem. The organizational reality is that people on site have to have a good deal of discretion in determining how resources are used, or the job has no chance of getting done. Some common practices which negotiate the conflict between delegation of authority and the pursuit of authorized goals are the following: Teachers use instructional time to have students decorate the classroom or the halls. Principals may call special assemblies to free staff for committee work. Teachers change the curriculum at will to reflect their personal tastes and priorities.

5 |Page

Of course, every one of these practices is given an educational justification so that it appears to be serving the pursuit of the goals it is deviating from. In fact, these practices often serve worthy goals. But they are not ones for which there is wide consensus on funding. Process vs. Product Luther Gulick finds a conflict between a focus on product and a focus on process. The essential questions are how should we divide our attention between these two concerns? And, when they conflict, which should take precedence? Are people given projects which they follow out to completion? If so, this is product oriented activity. If they are given repetitive piecemeal things to do, this is process orientation. Teaching is a bit of both. Lessons can be planned with product orientation. Teachers usually get to see some development and completion over a span of time. On the other hand, they don't get to see really long range effects, say, from first through twelfth grade. Process orientation can be done more cheaply if common activities are pooled, but there is no one responsible to see to it that completion occurs. They can always blame someone in the previous stage of the process for failure. In this sense, schools are process-oriented. Kids are pooled for common treatment because it is less expensive to do so. Careerwise, there is no overall attention given to students. Economies of scale reduce the effectiveness with which goals are achieved. Situations which point to an underlying conflict between process and product orientation are these:

School district consolidation vs. "small school" virtues such as school spirit, a feeling of sharing, a personal knowledge of all members of the school community Subject-matter focus and departmentalization in high schools vs. learner-centered focus and concern with development. Standardized testing and curriculum vs. the concern for the "specialness" of students. Class-size and teacher feelings of frustration in reaching kids.

Power vs. Morale Coercion is as essential a component of command as prescription or kinship. Ideally it should remain implicit, and when made explicit should manifest itself as rarely as possible as physical force, except in extreme emergency never falling arbitrarily or threatening the majority. Once a commander becomes as much an enemy to his followers as the enemy
6 |Page

himself -- and what else is a commander who breathes fire and sword against his own men? -- the mystification of his role is destroyed and his power, essentially an artificial construct, dissipated beyond hope of recall. -John Keegan, The Mask of Command People tend to find issues of power discomforting. Focussing on policies, rules, procedures and the like offers an escape from dealing with the role of power in organizations. Abraham Zaleznick comments ...executives are reluctant to acknowledge the place of power both in individual motivation and in organizational relationships. Somehow, power and politics are dirty words. And in linking these words to the play of personalities in organizations, some managers withdraw into the safety of organizational logics. Alvin Ward Gouldner , studying highly monocratic organizations, found that the desire to hide power-relations conflicts with getting more than minimal cooperation from organization members. If you don't yell, they don't work! However, some theorists take this to be an indication of organizational pathology. Why should we expect people to perform only when intimidated? What is it about an organization that its goals can only be achieved through compulsion? The issue of power in schools goes right to the heart of the professionalization controversy. Schools are in flux with respect to the power issue. Thus the power vs. morale conflict will vary depending upon the prerogatives accorded school people throughout the organization. Some situations that illustrate the power vs. morale conflict are these: Teachers are demoralized to discover that their textbooks have been selected for them by their local school board committee. Classroom morale may be negatively affected by a teacher's unnecessary expressions of authority. School spirit sinks as bullying becomes widespread. This is why New Jersey principal, Joe Clark, with his baseball bat raises the morale of those students he protects from the illegitimate power of bullying as he lowers the morale of staff members who see Joe Clark himself as a kind of bully.

References: Gary K. Clabaugh & Edward G. Rozycki The School as an Organization in Understanding Schools: the Foundations of Education (1990) NewYork: Harper & Rowe. 7 |Page

8 |Page

Part II - Diagnosing organizational conflict

Reported by Gregorio Reyes

MAJOR CAUSES OF CONFLICT

(1) The interpersonal disagreements that arise when one person is experiencing individual stress; (2) The problems resulting from role conflict, a condition that occurs when there is a clash over ones role in the organization (3) The power struggles that pit persons and groups against one another to achieve their own selfish objectives; (4) The misunderstandings and disagreements from differentiation i.e., the clashes that arise because people approach common problems from very different orientations (5) The interdependence requirements for collaboration which, if not extensive and balanced between the parties, cause communication and interaction breakdown which, in turn, if critical, lead to more intensive conflicts; and (6) 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.

Contingency Theory is one conceptual tool useful to integrate mutual self interests for managing organizational conflict. There are three major conflict management approaches from which an intervenor can draw to formulate an approach appropriate for resolving a dispute: collaboration, bargaining and power play. The appropriate use of any one of these methods depends on the individual and the organizational state. Collaboration. This theory maintains that people should surface their differences (get them out in the open) and then work on the problems until they have attained mutually satisfactory solutions. This approach assumes that people will be motivated to expend the time and energy for such problem-solving activity. It tries to exploit the possible mutual gains of the parties in the dispute and views the conflict as a creative force pushing them to achieve an improved state of affairs to which both sides are fully committed. Bargaining. This mode of managing conflicts assumes that neither party will emerge satisfied from the confrontation but that both, through negotiation, can get something they do not have at the start or more of something they need, usually by giving up something of lesser importance. One party generally wins more than the other; by the skilful use of tactical trades, he can get the maximum possible from he other side. Sometimes the tactics used in trading are underhanded and create bad feelings. In the end, when an agreement is reached, it is usually enforced by a 9 |Page

written contract with sanctions in case of non-compliance. In the event no agreement is reached, a third party mediator may be employed to bind the sides to eventual arbitration. Avoidance (withdrawal, peaceful coexistence, indifference) is often employed when dealing with conflict. Avoidance is useful (1) when it is not likely that the latent conflict really can be solved (live with it) or (2) when the issues are not so important to the parties as to require the time and resources to work them out. As Blake and his colleagues pointed out, avoidance can be in the form of a ceasefire, wherein two groups engaged in a long term struggle decided to keep in contact still entrenched in their position, but not to get locked into combat with each other. Power play/ struggle. This mode differs from the other two approaches because its emphasis is one self-interest. Whereas, in collaboration and bargaining the two sides come together to try to resolve their problems, when power is the dominant mode, the actions are unilateral or in coalitions acting unilaterally. All of the power technicians resources are unleashed against his opponent to win on a given issue or a long-range program. He gives neither internal commitment nor does he agree to external sanctions guaranteeing compliance to joint decisions.

10 | P a g e

Part III - EFFECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT

Reported by Cristina Trinidad

Conflict is actual or perceived opposition of needs, values and interests. A conflict can be internal (within oneself) or external (between two or more individuals). Conflict as a concept can help explain many aspects of social life such as social disagreement, conflicts of interests, and fights between individuals, groups, or organizations. Without proper social arrangement or resolution, conflicts in social settings can result in stress or tensions among stakeholders. When an interpersonal conflict does occur, its effect is often broader than two individuals involved, and can affect many associate individuals and relationships, in more or less adverse, and sometimes even humorous way. Conflict as taught for graduate and professional work in conflict resolution ( which can be win-win, where both parties get what they want, win-lose where one party gets what they want, or lose-lose where both parties dont get what they want) commonly has the definition: when two or more parties, with perceived incompatible goals, seek to undermine each others goal-seeking capability. One should not confuse the distinction between the presence and absence of conflict with the difference between competition and cooperation. In competitive situations, the two or more individuals or parties each have mutually inconsistent goals, either party tries to reach their goal it will undermine the attempts of the other to reach theirs. Therefore, competitive situations will, by their nature, cause conflict but if you have good sportsmanship or are just fair it wont cause undesirable conflict. However, conflict can also occur in cooperative situations, in which two or more individuals or parties have consistent goals, because the manner in which one party tries to reach their goal can still undermine the other individual or party. A clash of interests, values, actions or directions often sparks a conflict. Conflict refer to the existence of that clash. Psychologically, a conflict exists when the reduction of one motivating stimulus involves an increase in another, so that a new adjustment is demanded. The word is applicable from the instant that the clash occurs. Even when we say that here is a potential conflict we are implying that there is already a conflict of direction even though a clash may not yet have occurred.

Definition of Terms
A-Type Conflict Conflict that focuses on personalized, individually oriented issues. Burnout a pattern of emotional, physical, and mental exhaustion in response to chronic job stressor. Conflict the opposition of persons or forces giving rise to some tensions. 11 | P a g e

Confrontation and Problem Solving a method of identifying the true source of conflict and resolving it systematically. C-Type Conflict conflict that focuses on substantive, issue-related differences.

Cybernetic Theory of Stress, Coping, and Well-Being in Organization the view that stress is a discrepancy between an employees perceived state and desired state. Difficult Person an individual who creates problems for others, yet has the skill and mental ability to do therwise. Downsizing the laying off of workers to reduce costs and increase efficiency. Dysfunctional Conflict - a situation that occurs when a dispute or disagreement harms the organization. Functional Conflict a situation that occurs when the interests of the organization are served as a result of a dispute or disagreement. Job Demands-Job Control Model an explanation of job stress contending that workers experience the most stress when the demands of the job are high yet they have little control over the activity. Negative Lifestyle Factors Behavior patterns predisposing a person to job stress, including poor exercise and eating habits and heavy consumption of caffeine, alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. Open-Door Policy an understanding in which any employee can bring a gripe to the attention of upper-level management without checking with his or her immediate manager. Personality Clash an antagonistic relationship between two people based on differences in personal attributes, preferences, interests, values, and styles. Sexual Harassment unwanted sexually oriented behavior in the workplace that results in discomfort and/or interference with the job. Stress the mental and physical condition that results from a perceived threat that cannot be dealt with readily. Stressor any force creating the stress reaction. Work-Family Conflict conflict that ensues when the individual has to perform multiple roles; spouse; and often, parent. Win-win the belief that, after conflict has been resolved, both sides should gain something of value.

12 | P a g e

Effects of Conflicts
Functional and Dysfunctional Consequences of Conflict Functional Conflict Occurs when the interests of the organization are served as a result of a dispute or disagreement. Fosters higher levels of performance by arousing motivation, problem-solving ability, creativity, and constructive change.

Dysfunctional Conflict Occurs when a dispute or disagreement harms the organization. It wastes peoples time and creates a selfish climate that distracts workers from the interests of the firm. Can divert time and energy away from reaching important goals. May result in one party retaliating for the perceived wrongdoing of another party. Leads to anger/desk rage, incorporating aggression, hostility, and physical violence. Work Stress

Stress Is the mental and physical condition that results from a perceived threat that cannot be dealt with readily. Stress is therefore an internal response to a state of activation.

Stressor - is any force creating the stress reaction.

Symptoms of Stress 1. Physiological Reactions 2. Emotional Reactions 3. Behavioral Reactions Physiological symptoms - Increased heart rate - Blood Pressure - Breathing Rate Increased - Pupil Size - Perspiration - Men increases their risk of heart attack and stroke 13 | P a g e

Stress-related disorders: hypertensions, migraine, headache, ulcers, colitis or allergies - Chemical Imbalance that adversely affects the bodys immune system Emotional Symptoms Anxiety Tensions Depressions Discouragement Feeling of Unable to Cope Boredom Prolonged Fatigue Feelings of Hopelessness Various kind of defensive thinking

Behavioral Symptoms Nervous Habits such as facial twitching Sudden decreases in job performance due to forgetfulness and errors in concentration and judgment Lower job performance

Burnout Is a pattern of emotional, physical and mental exhaustion in response to chronic job stressor.

Factors Contributing to Work Stress

1. Factors within the Individual - A general stressor that encompasses both individual and organizational factors is having to cope with significant change.the more significant the change you have to cope with a short period of time, the greater the probability that you will experience a stress disorder. Hostile, aggressive, and impatient people find ways of turning almost any job into a stressful experience. This is a Type A personalities. The Type A personality people have a strong sense of time urgency, known as hurry sickness. Type A personality people are prone to cardiovascular disorders, particularly when the individual is hostile. 2. Adverse Organizational Conditions - According to the job demands-job control model, workers experience the most stress when the demands of the job are high yet they will have little control over the activity. In contrast, when job demands are high and the worker has high control, the worker will be energized, motivated, and creative. A major contributor to work stress is role overload. Demands on 14 | P a g e

managers and professionals are at an all-time high, as companies attempt to increase work output and decrease staffing at the same time. Conflict Management Styles 1. Competitive - Is a desire to win ones own concerns at the expense of the other party, or to dominate. A person with a competitive orientation is likely to engage in winlose power struggles. 2. Accommodative - Favors appeasement, or satisfying the others concerns without taking care of ones own. People with this orientation may be generous or self-sacrificing just to maintain a relationship. A dissatisfied employee might be accommodated with a larger-than- average pay raise just to calm the person and obtain his or her loyalty. 3. Sharing - Is halfway between the domination and appeasement. - Sharers prefer moderate but incomplete satisfaction for both parties, which results in a compromise. The term splitting the differences reflects this orientation and is commonly used in such activities as negotiating a budget or purchasing equipment. 4. Collaborative - Reflects a desire to fully satisfy the desires of both parties. It is based on an underlying philosophy of win-win, the belief that after conflict has been resolved, both sides should gain something of value. A win-win approach is genuinely concerned with arriving at a settlement that meets the needs of both parties, and at least one that does not badly damage the welfare of either side. When collaborative approach is used, the relationship between the parties improves. 5. Avoidant - The avoider is both uncooperative and unassertive. He or she is indifferent to the concerns of either party. The person may actually withdraw from the conflict or rely on fate. Conflict Resolution Methods

1. A. Confrontation and Problem Solving A widely applicable approach to resolving conflict is confrontation and problem solving, a method of identifying the true source of conflict and resolving it systematically. The confrontation approach is gentle and tactful rather than combative and abusive. Reasonableness is important because the person who takes the initiative in resolving the conflict wants to maintain a harmonious working relationship with the other party. D.H. Stamatis has developed six steps for confrontation and problem solving: Step 1. Awareness 15 | P a g e

Party A recognizes that a conflict exists between himself or herself and Party B. Step 2. The Decision to Confront Party A decides the conflict is important enough to warrant a confrontation with Party B and that such a conflict is preferable to avoiding the conflict. Step 3. The Confrontation. Party A decides to work cooperatively and confronts Party B. at this point, Party B may indicate a willingness to accept the confrontation or may decide to gloss over its seriousness. Often the conflict is resolved at this step, particularly if it is not serious or complicated. Step 4. Determining the Cause of Conflict The two parties discuss their own opinions, attitudes, and feelings in relation to the conflict, attempting to identify the real issue. For example, the real cause of conflict between a manager and a team member might be that they have a different concept of what constitutes a fair days work. Step 5. Determining the Solution to the Conflict and Further Steps In this step, the parties attempt to develop specific means of reducing or eliminating the cause of the conflict. If the cause cannot be changed, a way of working around the cause is devised. If both parties agree on a solution, then the confrontation has been successful. Step 6. Follow-Through After the solution has been implemented, both parties should check periodically to ensure that their agreements are being kept. 2. Confront, Contain, and Connect for Anger A variation of confrontation and problem solving has developed specifically to resolve conflict with angry people, which involves confronting, containing, and connecting. You confront by jumping right in and getting agitated workers talking to prevent future blowups. The confrontation, however, is not aimed at arguing with the angry person. If the person yells, you talk more softly. You contain by moving an angry worker out of sight and out of earshot. At the same time, you remain impartial. The supervisor is advised not to choose sides or appear to be a friend. Finally, you connect by asking open-ended questions such as What would you like us to do about your concerns? to get at the real reasons behind an out burst. Using this approach, one worker revealed he was upset because a female coworker got to leave early to pick up her daughter at day care. The man also needed to leave early one day a week for personal reasons but felt awkward making the request. So instead of asserting himself in explicit and direct fashion about his demands, he flared up. An important feature of the confront, contain, and connect technique is that it provides angry workers a place where they can vent their frustrations and report the outbursts of others. Mediator Nina Meierding says Workers need a safe 16 | P a g e

outlet to talk through anger and not feel they will be minimized or put their job in jeopardy. 3. Structural Methods A structural method of resolving conflict emphasizes juggling work assignments and reporting relationships so that disputes are minimized. One structural method for resolving conflict is for a manager to have direct control over all the resources he or she needs to get the job done. In this way, the manager is likely to experience conflict when attempting to get the cooperation of people who do not report directly to him or her. Conflict can often be reduced or prevented by one or more members from one organizational unit exchanging places with those of another unit; for example shifting from purchasing to manufacturing. Working in another unit can foster empathy. Reassigning people in this way can also encourage people to develop different viewpoints in the affected groups. As the group members get to know one another better, they tend to reduce some of their distorted perceptions of one another. Exchanging members works best when the personnel exchanged have the technical competence to perform well in the new environment. A long-standing structural approach to conflict resolutions is an appeals procedure. When the person cannot resolved a problem with his or her manager, the person appeals to a higher authority. The higher authority is ordinarily the next level of management or a member of the human resources department. The ability to help two group members in dispute resolve their conflicts is considered a high-level management skill. Top management in some firms maintains an open-door policy, in which any employee can bring a gripe to attention without checking with his or her immediate manager. The open-door policy is a popular grievance procedure because it allows problems to be settled quickly. Dealing with Difficult People Difficult Person is an individual who creates problems for others, yet has the skill and mental ability to do otherwise. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Use tact and diplomacy in dealing with annoying behavior. Use nonhostile humor. Give recognition and attention. Help the difficult person feel more confident. Rejoice civil behavior and good moods.

17 | P a g e

18 | P a g e