Managing Conflict

Conflict is an inevitable by-product of interpersonal dealings. This

is particularly true of work groups because they generally are expedi-

ently assembled collections of individuals with differing backgrounds,

perceptions, attitudes and values. Conflict, as defined by an expert in the

field, “refers to all kinds of opposition or antagonistic interaction. It is

based on scarcity of power, resources or social position, and differing

value structures”. But one should be careful not to assume that all con-

flict is bad. Conflict has two faces, one functional (or constructive) and

the other dysfunctional (or destructive). “Constructive conflict is both

valuable and necessary. Without conflict, there would be few new chal-

lenges; there would be no stimulation to think through ideas; organiza-

tions would be only apathetic and stagnant”.

Conflict triggers. A conflict trigger is a circumstance that increases the

chances of intergroup or interpersonal conflict. It can stimulate either

functional or dysfunctional conflict. As long as a conflict trigger ap-

pears to stimulate constructive conflict, it can be allowed to continue.

But as soon as the symptoms of destructive conflict become apparent,

steps should be taken to remove or correct the offending conflict trigger.

Major conflict triggers include: ambiguous overlapping jurisdictions; com-

petition for scarce resources; communication breakdowns; time pressure;

unreasonable standards, rules. Policies, or procedures; personality clashes;

status differentials; unrealized expectations.

Resolving conflict. Even the best managers sometimes find themselves

in the middle of dysfunctional conflict, whether it is due to inattention or

to circumstances beyond their control. In these situations, one or more

of the following conflict resolution techniques may be appropriate.

Problem solving. When conflicting parties take the time to identify

and correct the source of their conflict, they are engaging in problem

solving. This approach is based on the assumption that causes must be

rooted out and attacked if anything is really to change. The major short-

coming of the problem-solving approach is that it takes time, but the

investment of extra time can pay off handsomely when the problem is

corrected instead of ignored.

Superordinate goals. “Superordinate goals are highly valued, unat-

tainable by any one group (or individual) alone, and commonly sought”.

When a manager relies on superordinate goals to resolve dysfunctional

conflict, he or she brings the conflicting parties together and, in effect

says, “Look, we’re all in this together. Let’s forget our differences so we

can get the job done”. Although this technique often works in the short

run, the underlying problem totally crops up later to cause friction once

again.

Compromise. This technique generally appeals to those living in

a democracy. Proponents of this approach claim that everybody wins

because it is based on negotiation, or give, or take. But everyone loses

something in a compromise. Something must be given up if anything is

to be gained. Like problem solving, compromise takes time that man-

agement may or may not be able to afford. But, unlike problem solving,

the problem is worked around rather than solved.

Forcing. Sometimes, especially when time is important, management

must simply step into a conflict and order the conflicting parties to han-

dle the situation in a certain manner. Reliance on formal authority and

power of superior position are at the heart of forcing. Forcing does not

resolve the personal conflict and, in fact, may serve to compound it by

hurting feelings and/or fostering resentment and mistrust.

Smoothing. A manager who relies on smoothing, says to the conflict-

ing parties something like “Settle down. Don’t rock the boat. Things

will work out themselves”. This approach may tone down conflict in the

short run, but it doesn’t solve the underlying problem. As with the each

other conflict resolution techniques, smoothing has its place. It can be

useful when management is attempting to hold things together until a

critical project is completed or when there is no time for problem solving

or compromise and forcing is deemed inappropriate.

Text 3