Functional and Dysfunctional Conflicts
S. Ebi PearlinMA.HRM(1st year)
Topics to be covered
1. What id Conflict.?
2. Difference between the traditional, human relations, and interactionist views of conflict.
3. The conflict iceberg
4. Functional vs. Dysfunctional Conflict
5. Contrast task, relationship, and process conflict.
6. Outline of the conflict process.
7. 5 stages in the Conflict process
8. Conflict management techniques
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.o 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
o Incompatibility of goalso Differences over interpretations of factso Disagreements based on behavioral expectations
Transitions in Conflict Thought
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.
Transitions in Conflict Thought (cont’d)
Human Relations View of Conflict
The belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome in any group.
Interactionist 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.
The Conflict Iceberg
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 vs. Dysfunctional Conflict
• Functional Conflict serves organization’s interests
• Is commonly referred to as constructive or cooperative conflict
• Dysfunctional Conflict threatens organization’s interests
• Wastes the organization’s resources and is counterproductive
Functional or Dysfunctional is determined by whether the organization’s interests are served
Types of ConflictTask Conflict
Conflicts over content and goals of the work.
Relationship Conflict
Conflict based on interpersonal relationships.
Process Conflict
Conflict over how work gets done.
The Conflict Process
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
Stage II: Cognition and Personalization
Positive FeelingsPositive FeelingsNegative EmotionsNegative Emotions
Conflict DefinitionConflict Definition
Perceived ConflictAwareness by one or more parties of the existence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise.
Felt ConflictEmotional involvement in a conflict creating anxiety, tenseness, frustration, or hostility.
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.
Dimensions of Conflict-Handling Intentions
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.
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.
Stage IV: Behavior
Conflict Management
The use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve the desired level of conflict.
Conflict-Intensity Continuum
Stage V: Outcomes• Functional Outcomes from Conflict
o Increased group performance
o Improved quality of decisions
o Stimulation of creativity and innovation
o Encouragement of interest and curiosity
o Provision of a medium for problem-solving
o Creation of an environment for self-evaluation and change
• Creating Functional Conflict
o Reward dissent and punish conflict avoiders.
• Dysfunctional Outcomes from Conflict
o Development of discontent
o Reduced group effectiveness
o Retarded communication
o Reduced group cohesiveness
o Infighting among group members overcomes group goals
Types of Conflict
• Personality Conflict – Given the many possible combinations of
personality traits, it is clear why personality conflicts are inevitable
– A personality conflict is an interpersonal opposition based on personal dislike, disagreement, and/or different styles
• Intergroup Conflict– Conflict among work groups, teams and
departments is a common threat to organizational competitiveness
– Intergroup cohesiveness – a “we feeling” binding group members together – can be a good or bad thing (smooth running team or result in groupthink which limits critical thinking)
Minimizing Intergroup Conflict
• Conflict within the group is high
• There are negative interactions between groups
• Influential third-party gossip about other group is negative
• Work to eliminate specific negative interactions between groups
• Conduct team building to reduce intragroup conflict and prepare employees for cross-functional teamwork
• Encourage personal friendships and good working relationships across groups and departments
• Foster positive attitudes toward members of other groups
• Avoid or neutralize negative gossip across groups or departments
Recommended actions:Level of perceivedintergroup conflict
tendsto increase when:
Managing Conflict
• Stimulating Functional Conflict – Devil’s Advocacy– The Dialectic Method
• 5 Alternative Styles for Handling Dysfunctional Conflict– Integrating (Problem Solving), Obliging
(Smoothing), Dominating (Forcing), Avoiding and Compromising
• Third-Party Interventions– Conflict Triangles– Alternative Dispute Resolution
Stimulating Functional Conflict: Devil’s Advocacy
1) A proposed course of action is generated
2) A devil’s advocate is assigned to critique the proposal
3) The critique is presented to key decision makers
4) Any additional information relevant to the issues is gathered
5) The decision to adopt, modify, or discontinue the proposed course of action is taken
6) The decision is monitored
Stimulating Functional Conflict: The Dialectic Method
1) A proposed course of action is generated
2) Assumptions underlying the proposal are identified
3) A conflicting counterproposal is generated based on different assumptions
4) Advocates of each position present and debate merits of their proposals before key decision makers
5) The decision to adopt, either position or some other position is taken
6) The decision is monitored
5 Alternative Styles for Handling Dysfunctional Conflict
Integrating Obliging
Dominating Avoiding
Compromising
High Low
High
Low
Con
cern
for
Oth
ers
Concern for Self
1. Integrating (Problem Solving)– Is appropriate for complex issues plagued by
misunderstanding– Is inappropriate for resolving conflicts rooted in
opposing value systems– Its primary strength is its longer lasting impact because
it deals with the underlying problem rather than merely with symptoms
– However, it is very time consuming
5 Alternative Styles for Handling Dysfunctional Conflict
2. Obliging (Smoothing)– Involves playing down differences while emphasizing
commonalities– May be appropriate when it is possible to eventually get
something in return– Is inappropriate for complex or worsening problems– Its primary strength is that it encourages cooperation– However, it’s a temporary fix that fails to confront the
underlying problem
3. Dominating (Forcing)– Shows a high concern for self and low concern for others– Encourages “I win, you lose” tactics– Is appropriate when an unpopular solution must be
implemented, the issue is minor or a deadline is near– Is inappropriate in an open and participative climate– Its primary strength is speed– However, it often breeds resentment
5 Alternative Styles for Handling Dysfunctional Conflict
5. Compromising– A give-and-take approach involving moderate concern
for both self &others– Is appropriate when parties have opposite goals or
possess equal power– Is inappropriate when overuse would lead to
inconclusive or delayed action – Its primary strength is that the democratic process has
no losers– However, it only provides a temporary fix that can stifle
creative problem solving
5 Alternative Styles for Handling Dysfunctional Conflict
4. Avoiding– May involve either passive withdrawal from the problem
or active suppression of the issue– Is appropriate for trivial issues or when the costs of
confrontation outweigh the benefits of resolving the conflict
– Is inappropriate for difficult and worsening problems– Its primary strength is that it buys time in ambiguous
situations– However, it only provides a temporary fix that sidesteps
the underlying problem
Third-Party Interventions
• Conflict Triangles– When two people are having a problem and
instead of addressing the problem, one of them gets a third party involved
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) – Avoiding costly lawsuits by resolving
conflicts informally or through mediation or arbitration
Alternative Dispute Resolutions
Facilitation– A third party, usually a manager, informally urges
disputing parties to deal direction with each other in a positive manner
Conciliation– A neutral third party informally acts as a
communication conduit between disputing parties
Peer review– A panel of trustworthy co-workers hears both sides
of a dispute in an informal and confidential meeting
Alternative Dispute Resolutions
Ombudsman– Someone who works for the
organization, and is widely respected, hears grievances on a confidential basis and attempts to arrange a solution
Mediation– A trained, third-party neutral
actively guides the disputing parties in exploring a solution; the mediator does not render a decision
Arbitration– A trained, third-party neutral, makes
a decision regarding the dispute
Top Related