Presentation onConflict & negotiations in Organizational Behavior

AIM
To Acquaint the Students About Conflicts
& Negotiations (in Organizations)

GROUP MEMBERS
MAJ FAWAD HUSSAIN (MBA 4TH )
CAPT AZEEM HAFEEZ (MBA 4TH )
MUHAMMAD QAISER (MBA 4TH )

• (MAJ FAWAD)
INTRODUCTION
• (MAJ FAWAD)
DEFINITIONS
• (CAPT AZEEM / QAISER)
CONFLICT
• (QAISER / MAJ FAWAD)
NEGOTIATIONS
• (QAISER / CAPT AZEEM / MAJ FAWAD)
CASE STUDIES
SEQUENCE

• CONFLICT
Is a process that begins when one party perceives that another
party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect,
something that the first party cares about.
DEFINITION

A process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate for
them.
• NEGOTIATIONS
DEFINITION

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All
rights reserved.
14–8
Conflict
• Conflict Defined
– Is a process that begins when one party perceives
that another party has negatively affected, or is
about to negatively affect, something that the first
party cares about.
• Is that point in an ongoing activity when an interaction
“crosses over” to become an interparty conflict.
– Encompasses a wide range of conflicts that people
experience in organizations
DEFINITION

• Traditional View of Conflict
• Human Relations View of Conflict
• Integrationists View of Conflict
TRANSITIONS IN CONFLICT THOUGHT

rights reserved.
14–10
Causes:
• Poor communication
• Lack of openness
• Failure to respond to
employee needs
Traditional View of Conflict
The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be
avoided.

rights reserved.
14–11
Human Relations View of Conflict
The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable
outcome in any group.

Integrationists View of Conflict
The belief that conflict is not only a positive force in a
group but that it is absolutely necessary for a group to
perform effectively.

rights reserved.
14–13
FUNCTIONAL VERSUS
DYSFUNCTIONAL CONFLICT
Functional Conflict
Conflict that supports the goals
of the group and improves its
performance.
Dysfunctional Conflict
Conflict that hinders
group performance.

• Functional
– Increased group performance
– Improved quality of decisions
– Stimulation of creativity and
innovation
– Encouragement of interest
and curiosity
– Provision of a medium for
problem-solving
– Creation of an environment
for self-evaluation and
change
• Dysfunctional
– Development of discontent
– Reduced group effectiveness
– Retarded communication
– Reduced group cohesiveness
– Infighting among group
members overcomes group
goals
© 2009 Prentice-Hall Inc. All rights
reserved.
15-14

rights reserved.
14–15
TYPES Of CONFLICT
Task Conflict
Conflicts over content and
goals of the work.
Relationship Conflict
Conflict based on
interpersonal relationships.
Process Conflict
Conflict over how work gets done.

rights reserved.
14–16
THE CONFLICT PROCESS
E X H I B I T
14–1

rights reserved.
14–17
STAGE I: POTENTIAL OPPOSITION OR
INCOMPATIBILITY
• Communication
– Semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise”
• Structure
– Size and specialization of jobs
– Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity
– Member/goal incompatibility
– Leadership styles (close or participative)
– Reward systems (win-lose)
– Dependence/interdependence of groups
• Personal Variables
– Differing individual value systems
– Personality types

rights reserved.
14–18
STAGE II: COGNITION AND
PERSONALIZATION
Positive FeelingsNegative Emotions
Conflict Definition
Perceived Conflict
Awareness by one or more
parties of the existence of
conditions that create
opportunities for conflict to
arise.
Felt Conflict
Emotional involvement in a
conflict creating anxiety,
tenseness, frustration, or
hostility.

rights reserved.
14–19
STAGE III: INTENTIONS
Cooperativeness:
• Attempting to satisfy the other party’s concerns.
Assertiveness:
• Attempting to satisfy one’s own concerns.
Intentions
Decisions to act in a given way.

rights reserved.
14–20
Dimensions of Conflict-Handling
Intentions
E X H I B I T
14–2
Source: K. Thomas, “Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations,” in M.D. Dunnette and L.M.
Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., vol. 3 (Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992), p. 668. With permission.

rights reserved.
14–21
STAGE III: INTENTIONS (cont’d)
Competing
A desire to satisfy one’s interests, regardless of the
impact on the other party to the conflict.
Collaborating
A situation in which the parties to a conflict each
desire to satisfy fully the concerns of all parties.
Avoiding
The desire to withdraw from or suppress a conflict.

rights reserved.
14–22
STAGE III: INTENTIONS (cont’d)
Accommodating
The willingness of one party in a conflict to place the
opponent’s interests above his or her own.
Compromising
A situation in which each party to a conflict is
willing to give up something.

rights reserved.
14–23
STAGE IV: BEHAVIOR
Conflict Management
The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to
achieve the desired level of conflict.

rights reserved.
14–24
STAGE V: OUTCOMES
• Functional Outcomes from Conflict
– Increased group performance
– Improved quality of decisions
– Stimulation of creativity and innovation
– Encouragement of interest and curiosity
– Provision of a medium for problem-solving
– Creation of an environment for self-evaluation and
change

rights reserved.
14–25
STAGE V: OUTCOMES
• Dysfunctional Outcomes from Conflict
– Development of discontent
– Reduced group effectiveness
– Retarded communication
– Reduced group cohesiveness
– Infighting among group members overcomes
group goals

rights reserved.
14–27
CONFLICT-INTENSITY CONTINUUM
E X H I B I T
14–3
Source: Based on S.P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 93–97; and F. Glasi, “The Process of Conflict Escalation and the Roles of
Third Parties,” in G.B.J. Bomers and R. Peterson (eds.), Conflict Management and Industrial Relations
(Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 1982), pp. 119–40.

rights reserved.
14–28
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES
Conflict Resolution Techniques
• Problem solving
• Super ordinate goals
• Expansion of resources
• Avoidance
• Smoothing
• Compromise
• Authoritative command
• Altering the human variable
• Altering the structural variables
E X H I B I T
14–4
Source: Based on S. P. Robbins,
Managing Organizational Conflict: A
Nontraditional Approach (Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974),
pp. 59–89

rights reserved.
14–29
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES
Conflict Resolution Techniques
• Communication
• Bringing in outsiders
• Restructuring the organization
• Appointing a devil’s advocate
E X H I B I T 14–4
(cont’d)
Source: Based on S. P. Robbins, Managing Organizational Conflict: A Nontraditional Approach (Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974), pp. 59–89

rights reserved.
14–31
NEGOTIATION
Negotiation
A process in which two or more parties exchange
goods or services and attempt to agree on the
exchange rate for them.
BATNA
The Best Alternative To a
Negotiated Agreement; the
lowest acceptable value
(outcome) to an individual
for a negotiated agreement.

rights reserved.
14–33
BARGAINING STRATEGIES
Distributive Bargaining
Negotiation that seeks to divide up a fixed amount
of resources; a win-lose situation.
Integrative Bargaining
Negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that
can create a win-win solution.

rights reserved.
14–34
DISTRIBUTIVE VERSUS INTEGRATIVE
BARGAINING
E X H I B I T
14–5
Bargaining Distributive Integrative
Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic
Available resources Fixed amount of Variable amount of
resources to be divided resources to be divided
Primary motivations I win, you lose I win, you win
Primary interests Opposed to each other Convergent or congruent
with each other
Focus of relationships Short term Long term
Source: Based on R. J. Lewicki and J. A. Litterer, Negotiation (Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1985), p. 280.

rights reserved.
14–35
STAKING OUT THE BARGAINING ZONE
E X H I B I T
14–6

rights reserved.
14–36
THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS
E X H I B I T
14–7

rights reserved.
14–37
ISSUES IN NEGOTIATION
• The Role of Personality Traits in Negotiation
– Traits do not appear to have a significantly direct
effect on the outcomes of either bargaining or
negotiating processes.
• Gender Differences in Negotiations
– Women negotiate no differently from men, although
men apparently negotiate slightly better outcomes.
– Men and women with similar power bases use the
same negotiating styles.
– Women’s attitudes toward negotiation and their
success as negotiators are less favorable than men’s.

Third-Party Negotiations
Mediator
A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated
solution by using reasoning, persuasion, and
suggestions for alternatives.
Arbitrator
A third party to a negotiation
who has the authority to
dictate an agreement.

Third-Party Negotiations (cont’d)
Consultant
An impartial third party, skilled in
conflict management, who attempts
to facilitate creative problem
solving through communication and
analysis.
Conciliator
A trusted third party who provides an
informal communication link between
the negotiator and the opponent.

Shirley and Abdul both work for a software development company.
The manager of the new product division was originally the leader of
the project team for which she interviewed and hired Abdul. Shirley,
another project team member, also interviewed Abdul, but strongly
opposed hiring him for the project because she thought he was not
competent to do the job.
Seven months after Abdul was hired, the manager left the project to
start her own company and recommended that Abdul and Shirley
serve as joint project leaders. Shirley agreed reluctantly? With the
stipulation that it be made clear she was not working for Abdul. The
General Manager consented; Shirley and Abdul were to share the
project leadership. Within a month Shirley was angry because Abdul
was representing himself to others as the leader of the entire project
and giving the impression that Shirley was working for him. Now
Shirley and Abdul are meeting with you to see if you can resolve the
conflict between them.

Shirley says: "Right after the joint leadership arrangement was reached
with the General Manager, Abdul called a meeting of the project team
without even consulting me about the time or content. He just told me
when it was being held and said I should be there. At the meeting, Abdul
reviewed everyone's duties line by line, including mine, treating me as
just another team member working for him. He sends out letters and
signs himself as project director, which obviously implies to others that I
am working for him.“
Abdul says: "Shirley is all hung up with feelings of power and titles. Just
because I sign myself as project director doesn't mean she is working for
me. I don't see anything to get excited about. What difference does it
make? She is too sensitive about everything. I call a meeting and right
away she thinks I'm trying to run everything. Shirley has other things to
do? Other projects to run? so she doesn't pay too much attention to this
one. She mostly lets things slide. But when I take the initiative to set up a
meeting, she starts jumping up and down about how I am trying to make
her work for me."

• Abdul and Shirley seem to have several conflicts occurring simultaneously.
Identify as many of these individual conflicts as possible.
• What are the possible ways to deal with the conflict between Abdul and
Shirley (not just the ones that you would recommend, but all of the options)?
• What could or should have been done to avoid this conflict in the first place?
QUESTIONS

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS TO THE
QUESTIONS ASKED

SOLUTION SUMMARY
In this case scenario there are several issues
between Shirley and Abdul. First and foremost,
Shirley feels that Abdul is incompetent, thus her
perceptions of his capabilities are skewed and
there is a lack of respect to begin with. Shirley
also seems to have an issue with titles and
placement of authority (as Abdul mentions in his
summation of the conflict).

SOLUTION SUMMARY
Possible way to deal with the situation is to clearly define the
responsibilities to be performed by the two.
Both should work within set boundaries without interfering in other’s
matters or tasks and collaborating with each other .
Both should write Co – Project Director as designation with them.
Thereby indicating to all concerned that the project is not a show of
a single person.
Shirley should give due attention to this project as well, or if not
possible then leave it to be handled singularly by Abdul .
Both should be accommodating to the suggestion / changes
suggested by each other while doing the project.

SOLUTION SUMMARY
In order to avoid the conflict in first place following
could have been done :-
Both should have avoided to create the issue.
Both should have accommodated each other in running
the project.
Management should have used Authoritative command to
settle the issue at the start .
Independent tasks, goals and objectives could have been
given to them to avoid conflict and increase efficiency of
Abdul and Shirley.
Smoothing should have be carried out by Management to
play down the differences between the two developing and
surfacing in the initial stages of project.

Presentation onConflict & negotiations in Organizational Behavior

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Presentation onConflict & negotiations in Organizational Behavior

Ähnlich wie Presentation onConflict & negotiations in Organizational Behavior (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Presentation onConflict & negotiations in Organizational Behavior