Conflict process and management

Conflict Process Managing Conflict Case Studies Organizational Conflict Nidhi S Kohli 123720 R L Aparna 123716 Manisha K 123717 Priyanka G 123726 Swetha Joshi 123734 Sri Lakshmi 123732 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1. CONFLICT PROCESS i. Stephen. P. Robbins’s Classification ii. Ashwattapa’s Compilation 2. MANAGING CONFLICT * Conflict Resolution Techniques * Conflict Stimulation Techniques * Types of Conflict and Resolution 3. CASE STUDIES i.

Maruti Suzuki – Manesar Plant * Introduction * Findings * Suggestion & Conclusions ii. IndianHealthCare Organization * Introduction * Findings * Suggestion & Conclusions 4. BIBLIOGRAPHY Introduction Conflict Defined It is a process which begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affects, something that the first party cares about. Two main Schools of Thought * Traditional View A Belief that all conflicts are harmful and should be avoided. * Human Relations View

Belief that conflict is natural and an inevitable outcome in any group. It is not only a positive force but is also necessary for a group to perform well. CONFLICT PROCESS (As proposed by Stephen Robbins) Stage 1: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility: * The first step in the conflict process is the presence of certain conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise. * They need not lead directly to conflict, but one of them is necessary for conflict to arise. * These are the SOURCES of conflict. They can be broadly classified as: i. CommunicationSemantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “ noise” * Semantic difficulties arise as a result of difference in training, selective perception & inadequate information about others. * Potential to conflict arises in case of information overload or when information is too less. * Differing word connotations, jargon, insufficient exchange of information & noise in the communication channel are antecedent conditions to conflict. * The filtering process as information is passed through different levels of organization offer potential opportunities for conflict to arise. i. Structure * Size and specialization of jobs The larger the group & more specialized its activities, the greater the likelihood of conflict. The potential of conflict is greatest when group members are younger & turnover is high. * Jurisdictional clarity/ambiguity The greater the jurisdictional ambiguity in precisely definingresponsibilityfor actions, the greater the potential of conflict, as it increases inter-groups fighting for control of resources & territory. * Member/goal incompatibility

Groups within organizations have diversegoals. This diversity of goals among groups is a major source of conflict. *Leadershipstyles (close or participative) Tight & continuousobservationwith general control of other’s behaviors increases conflict potential. Also, research points out that participation & conflict are highly correlated, because participation encourages the promotion of differences. * Reward systems (win-lose) Conflict is created when one member’s gain is at another’s expense, especially in a group.

But, if a group is dependent on another group, opposing forces are stimulated if one’s gain is at another’s expense. * Dependence/interdependence of groups iii. Personal Variables * Differing individual value systems: The most overlooked variable is social conflict, i. e. differing value systems. They are differences such as prejudices, disagreements over one’s contribution in the group and rewards one deserves and the likes. *Personalitytypes: Having employees with different or opposing personality type, may lead to conflicts.

Eg: Individuals who are dogmatic and highly authoritarian and who demonstrate low esteem may lead to potential conflict. Stage 2: Cognition and Personalization: If the conditions cited in stage 1 negatively affect something that one party cares about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility becomes actualized in the second stage. The antecedent conditions can only lead to conflict when one or more of parties are affected by, and aware of, the conflict. As we noted in our definition of conflict, perception is required.

Therefore, one or more of the parties must be aware of the existence of the antecedent conditions. However, because a conflict is perceived does not mean that it is personalized. Example: A may be aware that B and A are in serious disagreement… but it may not make A tense or anxious, and it may have no effect whatsoever on A’s affection towards B. It is at the felt level, when individuals become emotionally involved, that parties experienceanxiety, tension, frustration or hostility. IMPORTANCE OF STAGE 2:

It is where conflict issues tend to be defined. It is the stage where the parties decide what the conflict is about. As a result this “ sense making” is critical because the way a conflict is defined goes a long way towards establishing the sort of outcomes that might settle it. Example: if I define our salary disagreement as a zero –sum situation –that is, if you get the increase in pay you want, there will be just that amount less for me- I am going to be far less willing to compromise than if I frame the conflict win- win situation (i. e. the dollar in the salary pool might be increased so that both of us could get the adds pay we want) ROLE OF EMOTIONS IN STAGE 2: Emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions. As they are classified into two: i) Negative emotions- to produce over simplification of issues, reduction in trust, and negative interpretations of the other party’s behavior. ii) Positive emotions- to increase the tendency to see potential relationships among the elements of problem, to take a broader view of the situation and to develop more innovative solutions. Stage 3: Intentions:

Intentions are decisions to act in a given way in a conflict. Intentions intervene between people’s perception and emotions and their behaviour. The dimensions of intentions are: * Cooperativeness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concerns) * Assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) Using these two dimensions five conflict handling intentions can be identified. When concern for the self is low, they could be unassertive and if concern for the self is high, they could be very assertive.

If the concern for others is low then they tend to be uncooperative and vice versa. 1) Competing: When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests regardless of the impact on the other parties to the conflict, he/she is competing. A competing style is high on assertiveness and low on cooperativeness. Competing style may be necessary when a quick, decisive action is required or when unpopular courses on important issues need to be implemented such as cost cutting and discipline a staff member. In addition this style may be required when “ you know you are right” is an issue. ) Collaborating: A situation in which the parties to a conflict each desire to satisfy fully the concerns of all the parties. In collaborating, the intention of the parties is to solve the problem by clarifying differences rather than by accommodating various points of view. A collaborating style is high on both cooperation and assertion. The parties to a conflict view it as a problem solving situation. A problem solving approach requires the following conditions: * The parties to a conflict channel their energies in solving the problem rather than defeating each other. The goals, opinions, attitudes and feelings of all parties are accepted * The parties should realize that the conflict issue can make an effective contribution to the quality of human relationships if the issue is solved through a supporting and trusting climate. A critical concept is here that no blame is assigned to anyone and the issue is kept in focus. It is time consuming and may be costly when many individuals are involved. It can be used in following situations: * When there is a high level of trust When you don’t want to have full responsibility * When you want others to also have ” ownership” of solutions * When the people involved are willing to change their thinking as more information is found and new options are suggested 3) Avoiding: A person may recognize that a conflict exists and want to withdraw from it or suppress it. Avoiding includes trying to just ignore a conflict and avoiding others with whom you disagree. Avoiding might take the form of postponing an issue for a better time or simply withdrawing from a threatening issue.

An avoiding style may reflect afailureto address important issues and a tendency to remain neutral when there is a need to take position. It can be advisable in situations like: * When more information is needed to take a good decision * When you desire that people should cool down so that they regain their perspective after which tension may be handled properly and productively * When someone else can resolve the conflict more effectively 4) Accommodating: when one party seeks to appease an opponent, that party may be willing to place the opponent’s interests above his or her own.

One party is willing to be self-sacrificing in order to maintain the relationship. This style is low in assertiveness and high in cooperativeness. A person who uses this style may be showing too little concern for personal goals as a result it may lead to lack of influence and recognition. The conflict is resolved without each party to a conflict presenting his or her own views. This style may be useful in following situations: * When maintaining harmony is more important * A conflict issue is more important to other person * Where relationships involved are more highly valued then a conflict issue ) Compromising: A situation in which each party to a conflict is willing to give up something. Compromise is a common and practical approach to conflict management, in which two equally strong and persuasive parties attempt to work out a solution. It is an important style to settle complex issues in the short run. It can also be used as a backup mode when both collaboration and competition fail to work effectively in resolving the conflicts. Conclusion: Intentions provide general guidelines for parties in a conflict situation. They define each party’s purpose. Yet people intention is not fixed.

During the course of conflict, they might change because of an emotional reaction to the behavior of other party. Stage IV: Behaviour: * The behaviour stage includes the statements, actions and reactions of conflicting parties. * This conflict behaviour is clear attempts to implement each party’s intention. * It is a dynamic process of interaction with a continuum. * Outcome maybe functional-improving group performance OR dysfunctional-hampering group performance. * When most people think of conflict situation they tend to focus on stage IV because this where conflict becomes visible.

The behaviour stage includes the statements, actions and reasons made by the conflicting parties. These conflict behaviours are usually overt attempts to implement each party’s intentions, but they have stimulus quality that is separate from intentions. As a result of miscalculations or unskilled enactments, overt behaviour sometimes deviates from original intentions. * It helps to think of stage IV as a dynamic process of interaction. For Example: you make a demand on me, I respond by arguing, you threaten me, I threaten you back, and so on. * All conflicts exist somewhere along this continuum.

At the lower part of the continuum, we have conflicts characterized by subtitle, indirect and highly controlled forms of tension, such as a student questioning in class a point the instructor has just made. Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum rage. * The outcomes may be functional or dysfunctional. Functional -improving group performance. Dysfunctional -hampering group performance. For the most part, conflicts that reach the upper ranges of the continuum are almost always dysfunctional. Functional conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the continuum.

STAGE V: Outcomes: The action-reaction interplay between the conflicting parties results in consequences or outcomes. These outcomes may be: * Functional in that the conflict results in an improvement in the group’s performance, or * Dysfunctional in that it hinders group performance. Functional conflict: A functional conflict is a confrontation between groups that enhances and benefits the organization’s performance. * For example, two departments in a hospital may be in conflict over the most efficient and adaptive method of delivering health care to low-income rural families.

Two departments agree on the goal but not on the means to achieve it. * Whatever the outcome, the low-income rural families probably will end up with better medical care once the conflict is settled. Without this type of conflict in organizations, there would be little commitment to change, and most groups would become stagnant. Functional conflict can lead to increased awareness of problems that need to be addressed, result in broader and more productive searches for solutions, and generally facilitate positive change, adaptation, and innovation.

Dysfunctional conflict: A dysfunctional conflict is any confrontation or interaction between groups that harms the organization or hinders the achievement of organizational goals. Management must seek to eliminate dysfunctional conflict. Beneficial conflicts can often turn into harmful ones. In most cases, the point at which functional conflict becomes dysfunctional is impossible to identify precisely. The same level ofstressand conflict that creates a healthy and positive movement toward goals in one group may prove extremely disruptive and dysfunctional in another group.

A group’s tolerance for stress and conflict can also depend on the type of organization it serves. Auto manufacturers, professional sports teams, and crisis organizations such as police and fire departments would have different points where functional conflict becomes dysfunctional than would organizations such as universities, research and development firms, and motion-picture production firms. Conflict can be considered as functional or dysfunctional depending on its effects on the organizational performance. Conflict also affects relationships within and between groups in several ways.

We will look first at changes that typically occur within conflicting groups and then at the changes that occur in the relations between such groups. Changes within Groups: Within groups engaged in conflict, the following changes are often observed: 1. First, external threats such as conflict bring about increased group cohesiveness. As a result, groups engaged in conflict become more attractive and important to their own members. 2. Increased cohesiveness suggests that conformity to group norms becomes more important. This may take the form of blind acceptance of dysfunctional solutions to the conflict.

This is referred to as the emphasis onloyalty. 3. Ongoing conflict also stimulates an emphasis on task performance. All efforts within each conflicting groups are directed towards meeting the challenge posed by other groups, and concerns about individual satisfaction lose importance. 4. A sense of urgency surrounds task performance; defeating the enemy becomes uppermost, and there is much less goofing off. 5. In addition, when a group is in conflict, otherwise reluctant members will often submit to autocratic leadership to manage crisis, perceiving participative decision making as slow and weak. . A group in such circumstances is also likely to place much more emphasis on standardized procedures and centralized control. Changes between Groups: In addition to these four changes within groups, four changes often occur in relations between conflicting groups: 1. Hostility often surfaces in the form of hardened “ we-they attitudes”. Each group sees itself as virtuous and other groups as enemies. 2. During conflicts, the perceptions of each group’s members become distorted. Group members develop stronger opinions of the importance of their unit. The marketing group in a business organization may think, “ Without us selling the product, there would be nomoneyto pay anyone else’s salary”. * The production group, meanwhile, will say, “ if we don’t make the product, there is nothing to sell. ” 3. The final change between groups is decreased communication. This can be extremely dysfunctional. The decision-making process can be disrupted, and the customers or others whom the organization serves can be affected. PROCESS OF CONFLICT (As Proposed by Ashwathappa) The process of conflict comprises of five stages: 1. Latent Conflict 2.

Perceived Conflict 3. Felt Conflict 4. Manifest Conflict 5. Conflict Outcome 1. Latent Conflict: When two or more parties need each other to achieve desired objectives, there is potential for conflict. Other antecedents of conflict such as interdependence, different goals, etc, do not automatically create conflict. But when they exist, they make it possible. Latent conflict often arises when a change occurs. Conflict is likely to be caused by a budget cutback, a change in organizational direction, a change in personal goals or the assignment of a new project to an already overloaded team.

Antecedents of conflict: * Incompatible personalities or value systems. * Overlapping or unclear job boundaries. * Competition for limited resources. * Inadequate communication. * Interdependent tasks. * Organizational complexity (conflict tends to increase as the number of hierarchical layers and specialized tasks increase). * Unreasonable or unclear policies, standards or rules. * Unreasonable deadline or extreme time pressure. * Collective decision making (the greater the number of people participating in a decision, the greater the potential for conflict). * Decision making by consensus. Unmet expectations (employees who have unrealistic expectations about job assignment, pay or promotions are more prone to conflict). * Unresolved or suppressed conflict. 2. Perceived Conflict: This is the stage at which members become aware of a problem. Incompatibility of needs is perceived and tension begins as the parties begin to worry about what will happen. But no party feels that it is being overly threatened. 3. Felt Conflict: At this stage, parties become emotionally involved and begin to focus on differences of opinion and opposing interests- sharpening perceived conflict.

Internal tensions and frustration begin to crystallize around specific, defines issues, and people begin to build an emotional commitment to their position. 4. Manifest Conflict: At this stage, parties engage in actions that help achieve own objectives and thwart those of others. Conflict behaviours vary from the subtle, indirect and highly controlled forms of interference, to direct, aggressive, violent and uncontrolled struggle. At the organisational level, strikes or lock-outs are the result. 5.

Conflict Outcome: The conflict finally results in an outcome, which may be functional or dysfunctional. * Functional conflict refers to confrontation between two ideas, goals and parties that improve employees’ and the organisation’s performance. * Dysfunctional conflict is the negative side of functional conflict. * If the conflict is handled well, the result is functional conflict. * If the conflict is mishandled, the consequence is dysfunctional conflict. MANAGING CONFLICT 1. CONFLICT RESOLUTION TECHNIQUES

Problem solving| Face-to-face meeting of conflicting parties to identify ; resolve conflict through open discussion| Super ordinate goals| Creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the cooperation of each conflicting party| Expansion of resources| Expansion of resources can create a WIN-WIN situation| Avoidance| Withdrawal from, or suppression of the conflict| Smoothing| Playing down differences while emphasizing common interests between conflicting parties| Compromise| Each party to the conflict gives up something of value| Authoritative command| Management uses its formal authority to resolve the conflict, then communicates it to the conflicting parties| Altering human variables| Using behavioral change techniques, such as human relations training to alter attitudes ; behaviors that cause conflict| Altering structural variables| Changing formal organizational structure ; interaction of patterns of conflicting personalities through ob design, transfers, creating of coordinating positions etc| 2. CONFLICT STIMULATION TECHNIQUES

Communication| Using ambiguous or threatening messages to increase conflict levels| Bringing in outsiders| Adding employees to a group whose backgrounds, values attitudes or managerial styles differ from those of present members| Restructuring the organization| Realigning work groups, altering rules ; regulations, increasing interdependence, ; making similar structural changes to disrupt the status quo| Appointing a Devil’s Advocate| Designating a critic to purposely argue against majority positions held by the group. | TYPES OF CONFLICT ; RESOLUTION 1) INTRA – PERSONAL CONFLICT 2) INTER – PERSONAL CONFLICT 3) INTRA – GROUP CONFLICT 4) INTER – GROUP CONFLICT 1. INTRA – PERSONAL CONFLICT: Intra personal conflict refers to the discord that occurs within an individual.

It is also called ‘ Intra individual Conflict’ or ‘ Intra psychic Conflict’ and is often studied by psychologists and personality theorists who are interested in the dynamics of personality and factors that pre-dispose people to inner conflicts. * Intra personal conflict can develop out of a person’s thoughts, ideas, emotions, values and pre-dispositions. This type of conflict is important because we encounter it on a daily basis and have to negotiate through it. * Though conflicts are usually viewed as negative, intra personal conflict has certain benefits. Healthy conflict provides an individual with the skills needed to develop better relationships, gain an understanding of oneself, increase resolution skills and avoid negative and damaging reactions.

Intra personal conflict can be disruptive and stressful if we do not understand our own needs and desires. Therefore, it is important to understand our deep emotions and interests and stay in touch with ourselves. Causes of Intra personal Conflict: Intra personal conflict occurs when there is incompatibility or inconsistency among an individual’s cognitive elements. It implies that a new cognitive element is at variance with a prior explanation or expectation. Causes: * Difficulty in making a decision because of uncertainty. * Individual’s are pushed or pulled in opposite direction, i. e. , attractive or unattractive alternatives. * Simultaneous forces of about equal strength. A person is motivated to engage in two or more mutually exclusive situations. * When a person is required to perform a task that does not match his/her expertise, interests, goals and values. Intra personal conflict also arises from frustration, numerous roles which demand equal attention but is not always possible to devote, goals having both negative and positive aspects, cognitive dissonances, and neurotic tendencies. Conflict from Frustration: Frustration occurs when a motivated drive is blocked before a person reaches a desired goal. GOALS (Reduction of Drives ; fulfills Deficiency) BARRIERS i. Overt ii. Covert DRIVE (Deficiency with Direction)

NEED (Deficiency) ( DEFENCE MECHANISMS A. Aggression B. Withdrawal C. Fixation D. Compromise FRUSTRATION * An individual driven by an inner state of deficiency engages in some action to fulfill the deficiency. * But his/her attempts to reach the goal are checked by barriers which may be Overt (external) or Covert (internal). * The overt barriers may be social or non-social * The social barriers are those which are placed by others in the way of reaching one’s goal. * The non-social barriers include floods, power failures, etc. * The covert barriers are those which are inherent or within an individual. These last longer than the external barriers. The internal barriers include physical weakness, disabilities, personal limitations like lack of skill and intelligence, etc. * Blocked by these barriers, an individual becomes frustrated for being unable to reach his/her goal. * Frustration normally triggers defence mechanisms in the person. Defence mechanisms refer to unconscious processes that protect an individual from anxiety, stress, external threats, etc. * They do not alter the objective conditions of danger, but simply change the way a person perceives it. They involve an element of self-deception. * The frustrated individual adopts any of the four defence mechanisms: Aggression, Withdrawal, Fixation or Compromise. Aggression refers to the attack of the barriers, physically or symbolically. * Withdrawal refers to backing away from the barrier. * Fixation refers to the continuation of efforts to break the barrier. * Compromise refers to the search for a new goal. * Conflict occurs in all the defence mechanism situations. Goal Conflict: Goal conflict is more complex than conflict from frustration and occurs when the attainment of one goal excludes the possibility of attaining another. There are four major forms of goal conflict. They are: 1. Approach-Approach Conflict 2. Approach-Avoidance Conflict 3. Avoidance-Avoidance Conflict 4. Multiple Approach-Avoidance Conflict 1. Approach-Approach Conflict: This conflict arises when the individual is caught between two or more positive but mutually exclusive goals. * Approach-Approach conflict is hardly a conflict at all, because whichever choice the individual makes, he/she will attain a positively valued outcome. * Such a conflict is easily resolved by satisfying one goal first, then the other- Eg. Eating first and then sleeping. * Alternatively, this conflict is resolved by giving up on one of the goals. Obviously, Approach-Approach conflict does not generate much anxiety. Unfortunately, Approach-Approach conflict does not always end as stated. Often, when the choice is made, “ decision regret” may occur. The option not chosen now becomes more attractive, simply because it was not chosen.

Decision regret may lead decision makers to reconsider the positive aspects of the chosen option and give them more weight to justify and validate the decisions made. 2. Approach-Avoidance Conflict: * This conflict occurs when an individual is simultaneously attracted to and repelled by a single goal object. * If the motive to avoid the goal is stronger than the motive to approach it, the person will be caught where the strengths of the motives are roughly equal. * As the person moves towards or away from the goal, the relatively stronger motive takes over and brings the person back to the point where he/she vacillates. Generally, the Approach-Avoidance conflicts that are most pervasive and difficult to resolve take place in the following: i. Independence vs.

Dependence: In times of stress, a person feels like resorting to the dependency characteristic ofchildhood, to have someone take care of a person and solve his/her problems. But he/she is taught to stand on his/her own feet which is a mark of maturity. ii. Co-operation vs. Competition: A person is taught to compete with others and make a success of one’s own efforts. At the same time, one is taught to co-operate and be helpful to others. iii. Impulsive Expression vs. Moral Standards: All societies place some degree of regulation upon impulse control. Sometimes. A person’s impulses may conflict most frequently with normal standards, and violation of these standards may generate strong feelings of guilt.

The Approach-Avoidance conflict is most relevant to the study of Organizational behaviour. Generally, organisational goals have both positive and negative aspects for organizational participants, and hence, it may arouse a great deal of conflict within a person and can actually cause the person to vacillate anxiously at the point where approach equals avoidance. 3. Avoidance-Avoidance Conflict: * This conflict occurs when an individual is forced to choose between two mutually exclusive goals, each of which possesses unattarctive qualities. The net result is that a person is caught between two options. * Faced with an Avoidance-Avoidance conflict, most people will vacillate between the two options, without resolving the conflict. In the context of an organization, Avoidance-Avoidance conflict may be exemplified by a worker who is caught in the dilemma of bearing with the supervisor whom he detests most and quitting the organization and remaning jobless. Two kinds of behaviour are likely to be conspicuous in Avoidance-Avoidance conflicts. * The first is vacillation. As the growth of a goal increases, the closer a person gets to the goal. As the person approaches a negative goal, he/she finds it increasingly repelling. Consequently, the person tends to withdraw, but when a person does this, he/she comes closer to the negative goal and finds it in turn increasing the negative valence. * A second feature of this kind of conflict is an Attempt to Leave the conflict situation.

Theoretically, a person might escape Avoidance-Avoidance conflict by running away from it altogether. But in practice, however, there are additional negative goals in the periphery of the situation and these prevent us from leaving. A person in Avoidance-Avoidance conflict may resort to other means to get relief from anxiety aroused by the conflict. 4. Multiple Approach-Avoidance Conflict: Often we are confronted with several possibilities for action, each having several desirable and undesirable features. A conflict of this type in which two alternatives- both involving positive and negative features- is referred to as a Double Approach-Avoidance Conflict or a Multiple Approach-Avoidance Conflict. Role Conflict: The final reason for intra-personal conflict is the need of an individual to play several roles simultaneously but finding time and resources inadequate to do so. * Role conflict is a type of social conflict caused from an individual being forced to take on separate and incompatible roles. * Role conflicts can occur individually, as in the case of one person being torn between separate roles for different organizations or groups, or within an organization, when an individual is asked to perform multiple roles in the same group. * Although all the roles which individuals bring into the organization are relevant to their behaviour in the study of Organizational behaviour, the organizational role is the most important. Cognitive Dissonance: * Cognitive Dissonance can lead to intra-personal conflict. Dissonance is the state of psychological discomfort or conflict created in people when they are faced with two or more goals or alternatives to a decision. * Although these alternatives occur together, they do not belong or fit together. * Cognitive Dissonance occurs when individuals recognize inconsistencies in their own thoughts and behaviours. * Such inconsistencies are stressful and uncomfortable, leading to intra-personal conflict. * Employees seek to remove inconsistencies by changing thoughts and behaviours, or by obtaining more information about the issue that is causing the dissonance. But cognitive dissonance, till it is removed, remains a source of conflict. Neurotic Tendencies: These are irrational personality mechanisms that an individual uses that create inner conflict. In turn, inner conflict often results in behaviours that lead to conflict with other people. * One example of neurotic action is the excessive use of tight organizational controls by neurotic managers, because they distrust people. Their excessive distrust and need to control, triggers conflict with others, especially subordinates who come to feel micromanaged and distrusted. * A common reaction to leaders with neurotic tendencies is either overt (open) or covert (hidden) aggression and hostility. Subordinates often try to settle the score and protect themselves from further abuse. These actions give the manager an even stronger sense of employee worthlessness. The manager’s hostility and attempts to control and punish become even more vigorous. STRATEGIES FOR RESOLVING INTRA-PERSONAL CONFLICTS: Intra-personal conflict arises from frustration, competing roles, or goals having positive or negative aspects. 1. Conflict from Frustration: * To the extent that conflict from frustration results from blocked goal realization, removal of barriers (overt and covert) will help resolve this conflict. It is the manager’s responsibility to clear his employee’s path for advancement in hiscareer. * Frustration is not always bad- it may contribute to improved performance.

The frustrated individual may divert his attention from barriers, towards his job and try to show better results. * This is particularly true with an individual who has aself conceptthat includes confidence in being able to do a job well. But this is no consolation for a manager to ignore the frustration of an employee. If conflict from frustration is not resolved for long, the manager will be running the risk of losing the services of a competent and sincere employee. 2. Goal Conflict: Goal conflict has three main dimensions: approach-approach conflict, approach-avoidance conflict and avoidance-avoidance conflict. * Of the three, approach-approach conflict has the least impact on organisational behaviour.

The manager’s involvement is not needed to resolve the conflict. It is best resolved by the employee himself/herself. The well known theory of Cognitive Dissonance helps the individual resolve the approach-approach conflict. The theory states that the person experiencing dissonance will be highly motivated to reduce or eliminate it and will actively avoid situations and information which would increase it. * Approach-avoidance conflict can be resolved by refusing to select either approach (positive aspect) or avoidance (negative aspect) choice. But an organizational member cannot avoid the conflict situation. He/she is forced to make a decision, and is therefore, exposed to conflict.

This conflict too can be resolved in the same way as cognitive dissonance: having decided either way (approach or avoidance), the individual may defend the decision. The manager has a responsibility to help the individual defend his/her choice. * Avoidance-avoidance conflict may be resolved by examining and solving the problems causing the conflict. An understanding of the reasons may help a person to overcome any prejudice he/she has developed against another person. Sound counseling from another person will be highly useful to the affected party. 3. Role Conflict: Role conflict can be resolved by minimizing the number of roles and fixing priorities for them. Once the priorities are determined, there must be no overlapping of roles. Much of the intra-personal conflicts in an organizational member can be resolved by developing compatibility between his/her personal and organizational goals. * A realization that he/she is working for the organisation and not for the managers will help him/her regain his/her balance and remain cool, irritants and hassles notwithstanding. The best solution for intra-personal conflict is to look to HinduPhilosophyand learn a valuable lesson from it. According to the philosophy, an individual is composed of three Gunas or psychogenic substances. They are: Sattwa, Rajas and Tamas. * Sattwa: It means Purity, Serenity, Poise, Calmness, Discrimination, Compassion, Clarity, Goodness, Altruism, Dispassion, Contentment, etc. , or together known as ILLUMINATION. Rajas: It means Love of Fame, Passion, Lust, Strife, Impatience, Jealousy, Pride, Display of Power, etc. , or together known as MOVEMENT. * Tamas: It means Anger, Pride, Ignorance, Stolidity, Offering Resistance, Inertia, forgetfulness, Confusion, Darkness, Brutality, etc. , or together known as OBSTRUCTION. It is essential that one should develop sattwic gunas in oneself, be it the manager or the managed. One can develop sattwic quality by reading holy scripts, regular prayers, moving with pious people, and leading a disciplined life. Unfortunately, modern organizations are filled with people who are imbedded with rajasic or tamasic qualities. Hence, the absence of harmonious industrial relations. 2. INTER- PERSONAL CONFLICT:

Too often when a conflict occurs between supervisor-subordinate, employees-customers, coworkers, or even friends, there tends to be either a fight (personal attacks) or a flight (embarrassed silence or leaving) response. Neither is an effective way of handling interpersonal conflict. More appropriate for resolving conflict and preserving positive relationships would be to follow this process. 1. Allow time to cool off. 2. Analyze the situation. 3. State the problem to the other person. Some other strategies for resolving conflicts are: * LOSE – LOSE: In this lose-lose approach to conflict both the parties lose. This approach can take several forms. One very common approach is to compromise or take the middle ground in a dispute. A second form can be to pay off one of the parties in the conflict.

These payments can take the form of bribes. A third approach can be to use an outside party or arbitrator to settle the dispute. A fourth approach can be to resolve the conflicts through the existing rules and law. It can sometime resolve the conflicts but the results are not always as desirable as win-lose and especially win-win approach. Lose-lose conflict is damaging and unhealthy to a relationship. Some people try to avoid conflict because they feel it’s negative and will hurt someone’s feelings. People like this will lose out because they don’t give their honest opinion or feedback. They become too concerned with how other people feel at the expense of their own feelings. WIN – LOSE: A win-lose conflict means just that–win or lose. It’s a type of conflict where just one person wins the argument while the other one feels bad. It’s a game to those who view conflict as a battle to win at all times and at the expense of another person’s loss. The win-lose approach is often used in American business settings. The primary emphasis is on winning all you can, overstate your position, and make decisions quickly. In contrast to this, the Japanese approach to business focuses on team work, cooperation, saving face, avoiding confrontation, understating your position, informally letting others know the bottom line, and reaching areas of agreement.

Though win lose strategy helps diffuse conflict, it may not be a permanent solution since the loser will tend to be bitter The following points make the strategy more clear: * There is a clear “ we-they” distinction between the parties. * The parties see the issue from their own point of view. * The emphasis is on the solution rather than on the values, goals and objectives. * There is no planned sequence of activities. * WIN – WIN: It is the most desirable way of resolving conflicts. In this situation, the energies and struggles are directed to solve the problem rather than beating the other party. The outcomes of this approach are so that both the parties are happy and results have benefits for both the parties.

Although this is the difficult most strategy to solve the problems but this should be goal of the managers to resolve interpersonal conflict Interpersonal conflicts arise in every workplace. Supervisors may help reduce the number and severity of these conflicts by: * Emphasizing that employee must, despite their differences, treat each other withrespect, dignity and fairness. * Eliminating a defensive climate in which employees judge and criticize each other, have hidden agendas and are close-minded to new ideas and changes. * Establishing a supportive climate where employees openly discuss and understand each other’s ideas and concerns, are willing to listen to each other, and focus on accomplishing their work and group goals. Providing training to employees on improving communication skills and settling differences effectively and on a timely basis. WAYS OF RESOLVING INTERPERSONAL CONFLICTS: The Defusing Technique: The other person might be angry and may come to the situation armed with a number of arguments describing how you are to blame for his or her unhappiness. Your goal is to address the other’s anger – and you do this by simply agreeing with the person. When you find some truth in the other point of view, it is difficult for the other person to maintain anger. Empathy: Try to put yourself into the shoes of the other person. See the world through their eyes.

Empathy is an important listening technique which gives the other feedback that he or she is being heard. There are two forms of empathy. Thought Empathy gives the message that you understand what the other is trying to say. You can do this in conversation by paraphrasing the words of the other person. * Exploration: Ask gentle, probing questions about what the other person is thinking and feeling. Encourage the other to talk fully about what is on his or her mind. For example, “ Are there any other thoughts that you need to share with me? ” * Using “ I” Statements: Take responsibility for your own thoughts rather than attributing motives to the other person.

This decreases the chance that the other person will become defensive. For example, “ I feel pretty upset that this thing has come between us. ” This statement is much more effective than saying, “ You have made me feel very upset. ” * Stroking: Find positive things to say about the other person, even if the other is angry with you. Show a respectful attitude. For example, “ I genuinely respect you for having the courage to bring this problem to me. I admire your strength and your caring attitude. ” 3. INTRA – GROUP CONFLICT: * Intra-group conflict refers to the incompatibility, Incongruence, or disagreement among the members of a group or its subgroups regarding goals, functions, or activities of the group. In Intra-group conflict the majority of the members of a group or its subgroups must be involved. Importance of groups: * First, groups are the building blocks of an organization. * Second, groups provide the primary mechanism for the attainment of organizational goals. * Third, groups provide psychological and other support to the individual members. The definition of a group should include the following: * A group must consist of two or more members. * A group must possess a stable structure; * The members should be interdependent. * The members should interact with each other. * The members should work toward the attainment of a common goal(s). Types of Groups: Groups can be broadly classified as formal or informal. 1.

Formal Groups: These are further classified as follows: * Task/Functional Groups: Fiedler (1967) classified task groups into three types according to the nature of task interdependencies among group members in attaining their group objectives. * Interacting group * Coaching group * Counteracting group * Project Groups 2. Informal Groups: These are further classified as follows: * Interest Groups *FriendshipGroups Effects of Intra-group Conflict: * Quality and quantity of team performance are considerably higher in competitive than cooperative conditions, * Heterogeneous members and consequent conflicts of interest and opinion produce better solutions to standardized sets of solutions. Affective conflict negatively influences group performance, group loyalty, work-group commitment, job satisfaction, and intent to stay in the present organization. Sources of Intra-group Conflict: * Leadership Style: * Situation A. * Situation B. * Situation C. * Universalistic approach and contingency approach, * i. e. , System IV for Likert and high concern for both production and people for Blake and Mouton) * Leadership can influence other variables, such as task structure, group composition, and size. * Task Structure * Routine (Simple, defined goals, procedures) * Non-routine (Complex) * Group Composition * Size * Cohesiveness and Group thinking

External Threats: 1. The external conflict needs to involve some threat. 2. The external conflict must affect the entire group and all its members equally and indiscriminately, and involve a solution. 3. The group needs to have been an ongoing one with some pre-existing cohesion or consensus, and to have a leadership that can authoritatively enforce cohesion (especially if all the members of the group do not feel the threat). 4. The group must be able to deal with the external conflict, and to provide emotional comfort and support to its members. Intervention: * Process * Team building * Structural * Change group membership * Changing the group size Altering the task * Changing the reward system * Modifying rules, procedures and appeal system. STRATEGIES FOR RESOLVING: 1. Invulnerability 2. Rationale 3. Morality 4. Stereotypes 5. Pressure 6. Self-Censorship7. Unanimity 8. Mind guards 4. INTER – GROUP CONFLICT: Intergroup relations between two or more groups and their respective members are often necessary to complete the work required to operate a business. Many times, groups inter-relate to accomplish the organization’s goals and objectives, and conflict can occur. Some conflict, called functional conflict, is considered positive, because it enhances performance and identifies weaknesses.

Dysfunctional conflict, however, is confrontation or interaction between groups that harms the organization or hinders attainment of goals or objectives. Causes of Intergroup Conflict: * One of the most prominent reasons for intergroup conflict is simply the nature of the group. Other reasons may be work interdependence, goal variances, differences in perceptions, and the increased demand for specialists. * Also, individual members of a group often play a role in the initiation of group conflict. Any given group embodies various qualities, values, or unique traits that are created, followed, and even defended. * These clans can then distinguish ” us” from ” them. Members who violate important aspects of the group, and especially outsiders, who offend these ideals in some way, normally receive some type of corrective or defensive response. * Relationships between groups often reflect the opinions they hold of each other’s characteristics. When groups share some interests and their directions seem parallel, each group may view the other positively; however, if the activities and goals of groups differ, they may view each other in a negative manner. * When trying to prevent or correct intergroup conflict, it is important to consider the history of relations between the groups in conflict. * History will repeat itself if left to its own devices. Limited resources and reward structures can foster intergroup conflict by making the differences in group goals more apparent.

Resolving Inter-group conflict: The approaches available for resolving intra-personal and inter-personal conflicts can be used to solve inert-group disputes too. However, certain unique approaches are available for resolving inter-group conflict. They are: 1. Problem-solving: problem-solving is considered to be the most effective approach available as it emphasizes the attainment of the common interest of both conflicting parties. In the problem-solving strategy, attempts are made to find a solution that reconciles or integrates the need of both the parties. The two parties work together both to define the problem and to identify mutually satisfactory solutions.

Moreover, there is open expression of feelings as well as exchange of task related information. 2. Organisation redesign: changing organisational structure is another approach for resolving conflict, particularly when the sources of conflict come from the coordination of work among different departments or divisions. One way of redesigning organisations is to reduce task inter dependence between groups and give each group clear responsibilities. Another way is to transfer or exchange members of conflicting groups. An appeal system may also be developed to eliminate the arbitrary use of power. 3. Super ordinate goals: appealing to super ordinate goals is another way of resolving conflict.

The super ordinate goal is a common goal of both conflicting parties and the combined efforts of both parties will be needed to realize the goal. It takes precedence over other goals which may separate the conflicting parties. Survival of the organisation for example, can be a super ordinate goal. Creating awareness that the organisation’s survival will be jeopardized if conflicting groups do not work in unison and can have a salutary effect on disputing parties. 4. Expansion of resources: to the extent that scarce resources cause conflict, removing their scarcity will help resolve conflict. If Upgradation of one’s position has caused ripples elsewhere, some more jobs might be similarly upgraded.

If increased budget allocation to one department has caused heart burn to the members of rival departments, the rivaldivision’s allocation can also be correspondingly increased, and so on. 5. Avoidance: when the issue is trivial, avoidance strategy will be useful. In the avoidance strategy, the party or parties to the conflict may either withdraw from the conflict or conceal the incompatibility. In the first instance, one of the conflicting parties or both will withdraw from the conflicting situation. Where avoidance is not possible, concealing the fact by either or both conflicting parties that there is conflict may help defuse the conflict. 6. Smoothen: the process of playing down the differences between the individual and groups and highlighting their common interest is called smoothening.

Finding and emphasizing similarities between conflicting parties, while playing down differences, can eventually lead the parties to realize that the two are not as far apart as was first believed. With shared viewpoints on some issue, the ability to work towards a smoothen can help reduce the intensity of the conflict and avoid an escalation of open hostility. However, smoothen is recommended as a stop gap measure to let people cool down and regain perspective. CASE STUDIES 1. Maruti Suzuki (Manesar) Company Profile: * MSIL – Maruti Suzuki India Ltd * It is a Japanese automobile company * Publicly listed automaker in India * First to mass produce and sell more than million cars The company’s headquarters are located Kasturba Gandhi Marg in New Delhi. * Products: Maruti 800, Alto, Wagnor, Ritz, Swift, Dzire, Omni, Kizashi Evolution in India: * 2 phases pre-liberalization (1983-1996) * 2 phases post liberalization (1997-2001) * Employee number : 6, 903 * Style of management : Japanese style * Captured and maintains 80% market share Reasons for choosing Maruti Manesar: * It is the most recent organizational conflict * Shows practical framework of theory * Availability of proper and abundant information * It is a classic example of inter-group conflict Case Findings: * Management-Worker rift reasons: * WORKERS’ TAKE: Workers were paid lesser than counterparts in other locations * Workers were paid lesser than competitor’s workers in same position * Contract , permanent and seasonal workers were paid same wages * Working conditions – only 7 minutes tea break (both shifts) – Not allowed to attend nature’s call * The managers and supervisors resorted to use of derogatory and abusive behaviour constantly. * MANAGEMENTS APPROACH: * CEO Shinzo Nakanishi said he did not have any indication of such discontent. * workers did not attend the pre-shift meetings * Workers productivity was less, hence they were laid off Result: * Workers’ demands of wage hike not met immediately * First Step – AVOIDANCE * Second Step – De-recognition * Third Step – Fired workers * Plant and company’s productivity suffered almost 50% * Company’s goodwill marred Comparison between Theory and Practice: Summary & Conclusions: * It is a case of inter-group conflict It followed closed leadership style & is latent conflict * Discontent was brewing for over an year before the volcano erupted * The management should have been pro-active * Channels of communication must be strengthened * The workers should not have resorted toviolence* Proper conflict resolution system should be put in effect and its presence communicated to all * Management should have empathized. * Management should alternate conflict resolution strategy as per situation 2. Indian Healthcare Organization (ACase Studyon inter-personal and inter-group conflicts) Profile: * The Indian Healthcare Organization is situated in the Budgam district of Jammu and Kashmir. * The hospital is a non-profit one, formed in the year 1979. Reasons for choosing this case study: This case contains both, inter-personal & inter-group conflicts * Conflicts in a medical organisation will drastically affect the society * Through this case, we can get a clear understanding of the: * Conflict Process * Adult egos * WIN-WIN situation Situation: * One fine morning, the Indian Healthcare Organization was gearing up for its monthly meeting of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO), its other Medical and Para-medical officers. * Mr. Kumar, who is one of the paramedics in the hospital, had fixed a prior appointment in connection with discussing some problem with the CMO, Mr. Sharma, through the CMO’s personal assistant (PA). As he approached the PA’s room, a saw a Dr. Kapoor, one of the doctors in the hospital, talking to the PA. So he waited outside for sometime. * As the time of the meeting was approaching nearer, he went inside the PA’s room and reminded the PA of his appointment. At this Dr. Kapoor got very much irritated and annoyed for this interruption and shouted at him to leave the room, calling him an idiot. * Mr. Kumar was taken aback and felt crest fallen and started murmuring and came out of the room teary eyed. * Mr. Kumar reported the matter to his fellow paramedics who were standing outside in the corridor. All of them got infuriated and took it as an insult to the whole group. In this process, other doctors who had assembled there asked Dr. Kapoor about what has happened and learning of the whole situation, advised Mr. Kumar to forget the incident and seek a fresh appointment. * At this, a strong reaction came from the paramedics’ group and they started protesting and raising slogans. This protest eventually led to verbal as well as physical abuses between the two groups. * The CMO, Mr. Sharma came out of his Room after hearing the loud voices. Seeing the protests, he called Mr. Kumar and his group to his room to hear from them about the situation. * The group requested Dr. Sharma for immediate justice in the form of a written apology from Dr. Kapoor to Mr.

Kumar, who for his no fault was badly insulted. At this, Dr. Sharma was shocked. * After this, Dr. Sharma also called Dr. Kapoor and his group members inside to hear their version and informs them about the APOLOGY demanded by the other group. They refused to do the same. * At this point Dr. Sharma was wondering how to conduct the monthly meeting. He started thinking as how to end this conflict between MEDICAL AND PARAMEDICAL GROUP. * MR. SHARMA decides to call MR. KUMAR and DR. KAPOOR together to sort out their problem. Result: * DR. KAPOOR and MR. KUMAR sit face to face in the presence of DR. SHARMA * They realize they are fighting over a petty issue They reconcile and communicate this to their respective groups who in turn mellow down. Comparison between Theory and Practice: Theory PUT into practice | Theory NOT put into Practice | * Dr. Sharma used Exploration technique. * DR. SHARMA also used problem solving and smoothing techniques of conflict resolution. * Both the parties compromised in the end and let go of “ adult ego”. | * Since it is a case of conflicting personalities, STAGE IV (Behaviour) becomes STAGE I here. * Mr. Kumar did not approach the Redressal Forum. * Dr. Sharma approached both parties separately. * Both the groups did not follow protocol. | FINDINGS: It is an inter-personal conflict which blew up into an inter-group conflict * It is a WIN-WIN situation * It is also Felt conflict with parties becoming emotionally involved. * DR. SHARMA used the problem solving conflict resolution technique * The smoothing technique is also used SUGGESTIONS: * The PA should have acted in a more responsible manner * Dr. Kapoor should not have resorted to abusing Mr. Kumar * Mr. Kumar should not have involved his colleagues * Dr. Kapoor should also have refrained from group discussion * Dr. Sharma should not have met the parties separately MANAGING CONFLICT Actions to Avoid in Conflict Resolution: Do not avoid the conflict, hoping it will go away. * Do not meet separately with people in conflict. * Do not believe, for even a moment, the only people who are affected by the conflict are the participants. Actions to Undertake: * Ask each participant to describe specific actions they’d like to see the other party take * You, as the supervisor, must own some of the responsibilities * Understand if the situation needs further exploration * All participants discuss and commit * You expect the individuals to resolve the conflicts proactively as adults. * Assure both parties that you have every faith in their ability to resolve their differences BIBLIOGRAPHY Books: Websites: