NATURE OF CONFLICT
Syed Zulkifal
MS (HR)- Bradford University –UK
Visiting Faculty
IMSciences
What is Conflict?
• Narrow concept: March and Simon (1958, p. 112)
consider conflict as a breakdown in the standard
mechanisms of decision making, so that an individual
or group experiences difficulty in selecting an
alternative.
• Broad Concept: Pondy (1967) has argued that
organizational conflict can best be understood as a
dynamic process underlying organizational behaviour.
• Tedeschi et al. (1973) take a middle position, defining
conflict as “an interactive state in which the behaviours
or goals of one actor are to some degree incompatible
with the behaviours or goals of some other actor or
actors” (p. 232).
Cont.
• Definitions overlap with respect to the following
elements:
1. Conflict includes opposing interests between individuals
or groups in a zero-sum situation;
2. Such opposed interests must be recognized for conflict
to exist;
3. Conflict involves beliefs, by each side, that the other
will thwart (or has already thwarted) its interests;
4. Conflict is a process; it develops out of existing
relationships between individuals or groups and reflects
their past interactions and the contexts in which these
took place; and
5. Actions by one or both sides do, in fact, produce
thwarting of others’ goals .
Contd.
• Conflict is defined as an interactive process
manifested in incompatibility, disagreement, or
dissonance within or between social entities (i.e.,
individual, group, organization, etc.).
• Conflict occurs when one or (two) social
entity/ies:
1. Is required to engage in an activity that is
incongruent with his or her needs or interests;
2. Holds behavioural preferences, the satisfaction of
which is incompatible with another person’s
implementation of his or her preferences;
Contd.
3. Wants some mutually desirable resource that is in
short supply, such that the wants of everyone
may not be satisfied fully;
4. Possesses attitudes, values, skills, and goals that
are salient in directing one’s behaviour but that
are perceived to be exclusive of the attitudes,
values, skills, and goals held by the other(s);
5. Has partially exclusive behavioural preferences
regarding joint actions; and
6. Is interdependent in the performance of
functions or activities.
CONFLICT AND COMPETITION
• Conflict is considered as a situation of competition in
which the parties are aware of the incompatibility of
potential future positions and in which the party wishes
to occupy a position that is incompatible with the
wishes of the other,
• conflict occurs when the parties become aware of the
incompatibility and wish to interfere with the
attainment of each other’s goal attainments.
• Conflicts may be placed along a continuum of
cooperative to competitive,
• three ideal points along this cooperative–competitive
continuum to facilitate the categorization of conflicts:
Contd.
• Purely cooperative conflicts (technically, “positivesum games” or “conflicts of coordination”),
• Purely competitive conflicts are technically termed
“zero-sum games” or “negative-sum games”,
• most conflicts are characterized by both
cooperative and competitive aspects (i.e., they are
“nonzero-sum games” or “mixed-motive”
conflicts).
CLASSIFICATION OF CONFLICT
• Conflict may be classified on the basis of its sources.
• It may also be classified on the basis of organizational
levels (individual, group, etc.),
Sources of Conflict
• Conflict may originate from a number of sources, such
as tasks, values, goals, and so on,
1. Affective/Psychological /Relationship/Emotional
• when two interacting social entities, become aware
that their feelings and emotions regarding some or all
the issues are incompatible,
• “a condition in which group members have
interpersonal clashes characterized by anger,
frustration, and other negative feelings”
Contd.
2. Substantive/Task/Cognitive/Issue Conflict
• when two or more organizational members disagree on
their task or content issues
• “disagreements among group members’ ideas and
opinions about the task being performed, such as
– disagreement regarding an organization’s current strategic
position or determining the correct data to include in a
report”
3. Conflict of Interest
• “an inconsistency between two parties in their
preferences for the allocation of a scarce resource.”
• The contention of managers A and B for the same vice
president’s job exemplifies a conflict of interest.
Contd.
4. Conflict of Values/Ideological Conflict
• when two social entities differ in their values or
ideologies on certain issues,
• For example ideological disagreement of supervisors A
and B on the question of “compensatory hiring”.
5. Goal Conflict
• when a preferred outcome or an end-state of two
social entities is inconsistent.
• For example the understanding of managers A and B
that only one of their preferred job design programs
can be implemented for their division.
Contd.
6. Realistic versus Non-realistic Conflict
• Realistic Conflict refers to incompatibilities that have rational
content (i.e., tasks, goals, values, and means and ends).
• Realistic conflict is associated with “mostly rational or goaloriented” disagreement,
• Non-realistic conflict occurs as a result of a party’s need for
releasing tension and expressing hostility, ignorance, or error.
7. Institutionalized versus Non-institutionalized Conflict
• Institutionalized conflict is characterized by situations in
which actors follow:
–
–
–
–
explicit rules,
display predictable behaviour, and
their relationship has continuity,
For example line–staff conflict or labour–management
negotiations.
Contd.
• Most racial conflict is non-institutionalized where these three conditions are
nonexistent.
8. Retributive Conflict
• This conflict is characterized by a situation where the conflicting entities feel
the need for a drawn-out conflict to punish the opponent,
• Each party determines its gains, in part, by incurring costs to the other
party.
9. Misattributed Conflict
• This relates to the incorrect assignment of causes (behaviours, parties, or
issues) to conflict,
• For example, an employee may wrongly attribute to his or her supervisor a
cut in the employee’s department budget, which may have been done by
higher-level managers over the protest of the supervisor.
10. Displaced Conflict
• This type of conflict occurs when the conflicting parties either direct their
frustrations or hostilities to social entities who are not involved in conflict or
argue over secondary, not major, .issues
Levels of Analysis
• Organizational conflict may be classified as
intra-organizational or inter-organizational,
• Intra-organizational conflict may be classified
as
– intrapersonal,
– interpersonal,
– intra-group, and
– Inter-group.
Contd.
1. Intrapersonal Conflict
• Also known as intra-individual or intra-psychic conflict.
• This type of conflict when an organizational member is
required to perform certain tasks and roles that do not
match his or her expertise, interests, goals, and values.
2. Interpersonal Conflict
• Also known as dyadic conflict.
• It refers to conflict between two or more organizational
members of the same or different hierarchical levels or
units.
• superior–subordinate conflict relate to this type of
conflict.
Cont.
3. Intra-group/intra-departmental Conflict
• refers to conflict among members of a group or
between two or more subgroups within a group in
connection with its goals, tasks, procedures, etc.
4. Intergroup/interdepartmental Conflict
• It refers to conflict between two or more units or
groups within an organization.
– Conflicts between line and staff,
– production and marketing, and
– headquarters and field staffs
STYLES OF HANDLING
INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT
Model of Two Styles
• Deutsch (1949) first suggested the simple cooperative–
competitive model,
• Knudson, Sommers, and Golding (1980), suggested engagement –
avoidance model,
Model of Three Styles
• Putnam and Wilson (1982) suggested that there are three styles of
handling interpersonal conflict:
– non-confrontation (obliging),
– solution-orientation (integrating), and
– control (dominating).
• Billingham and Sack (1987) (reasoning, verbal aggression, and
violence) and
• Rands, Levinger, and Mellinger (1981) (attack, avoid, and
compromise).
Contd.
Model of Four Styles
• based on the two dimensional model that consists of
– concern for self (high or low) and
– concern for others (high or low).
• Pruitt (1983) suggested that there are four styles of handling
conflict:
–
–
–
–
yielding,
problem solving,
inaction, and
contending.
• According to Pruitt (1983) and Pruitt and Carnevale (1993)
problem-solving style is the best for managing conflict
effectively.
Contd.
Model of Five Styles
• First conceptualized in 1926 by Mary P. Follett (1940),
• She conceptualized three primary ways of handling
organizational conflict—
– domination,
– compromise, and
– integration
• secondary ways of handling conflict, such as
– avoidance and
– suppression.
A Two-Dimensional Model of the Styles of
Handling Interpersonal Conflict.
Contd.
•
•
•
•
•
Integrating Style/problem solving
Obliging Style/accommodating
Dominating Style/competing
Avoiding Style/suppression
Compromising Style
Integrative and Distributive
Dimensions