Table of Contents |
People often grow and learn from conflict, as long as the conflict is not dysfunctional conflict, meaning the source of the disagreement or the way it is handled is unhealthy for the organization and for the individuals involved.
EXAMPLE
An operations team is divided over implementing a new inventory management system that will automatically track outgoing materials as they are used. Those in favor of the new system see it as lightening their workload, while others see it as a major investment that could be used in better ways, such as an updated break room. This conflict can be resolved through open dialogue but might also escalate if not addressed, as you will see below.The challenge for managers is to ensure that conflict is addressed in a healthy, constructive way. However, managers often make poor decisions about handling conflict, such as failing to address it or trying to find a compromise that, rather than making everybody happy, does the opposite. These ineffective outcomes can hurt the morale of workers and the efficiency of the business. Five ineffective ways to handle conflict are:
| Strategy | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Nonaction | The manager does nothing and ignores the problem. This is rarely effective in group conflict. | A manager implementing the new inventory system ignores the complaints about the new system. This lets the conflict fester. |
| Administrative orbiting | The manager acknowledges that a problem exists but defers on taking action by referring to administrative processes. | The manager tells the workgroup that he “raised it at the last managerial meeting” but has no more information. |
| Due process nonaction | There is an organizational process for addressing grievances, but the process is complicated, costly, or even risky. This might even be done on purpose, to discourage people from making official complaints. This is unfortunately common in complaints about workplace harassment or discrimination. | The manager reminds the staff grumbling about the new inventory system that their performance reviews can express any dissatisfaction with the organization or their work environment. Workers are not that confident their complaints will not be held against them later. |
| Secrecy | The manager avoids conflict by not being transparent about organizational decisions. The organization may have a culture of secrecy among leaders beyond what is needed for security. This leads to distrust of management by workers and low morale. | The manager knows a new break room was rejected but does not tell staff because he’s worried about the response. |
| Character assassination | In the worst cases, the person or persons making a complaint are isolated and stigmatized, encouraged to stop complaining, or give up and leave the organization. This is another unfortunately common tactic in cases of harassment or discrimination. | The conflict becomes dysfunctional, with the disgruntled workers labeled as whiners. The unresolved conflict spills over into other areas within the workplace. |
On the positive side, there are many things managers can do to reduce or actually solve conflict when it occurs. These fall into two categories: actions directed at conflict prevention and actions directed at conflict reduction. We shall start by examining conflict prevention techniques because preventing conflict is often easier than reducing it once it begins. These include:
| Strategy | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Emphasizing organization-wide goals and effectiveness | If organizational or department goals are emphasized, employees are more likely to see the big picture and work together to achieve common goals. | The manager from the previous example introduces the new inventory system as a tool that will improve the department’s efficiency and help the organization remain competitive. |
| Providing stable, well-structured tasks | Conflict is less likely to emerge when work activities are clearly defined, understood, and accepted by employees. | The manager recognizes that he was inconsistent in enforcing the policy that all workers document their usage of materials. If this obligation was clear and enforced, there would be no perception that the expensive new system is chosen to solve a problem with only a few undisciplined employees. |
| Facilitating intergroup communication | Conflict can emerge from misperception of the abilities, goals, and motivations of others. As groups come to know more about one another, suspicions often diminish, and greater intergroup teamwork becomes possible. | The actions taken above would set a better tone for the discussion of a new system since it would not be perceived as needed to make up for the errors of a few irresponsible individuals. |
| Avoiding win-lose situations | The perception that one group “wins” and the other “loses” creates conflict or lets it grow. This is common in organizations with limited resources. Allocation that shares resources or is transparent about decisions in terms of organizational success can mitigate this conflict. | One mistake that could have been avoided is presenting the inventory system and break room as a one-or-the-other proposition. Instead, the manager could tell the group they can all contribute to the new break room by demonstrating their efficiency in using resources and money they’ve saved the organization, which in turn is aided by the new inventory management system. This helps the workgroup feel unified and gives them an attainable group objective and outcome to energize them. |
Not all conflict can be managed, and the sources of conflict at work are not always directly related. Workers bring other differences—cultural, religious, political, and personal—that can lead to friction. While many of these differences are in the realm of protected categories, others are not.
Where dysfunctional conflict already exists, something must be done, and managers may pursue one of at least two general approaches: They can try to change employee attitudes, or they can try to change employee behaviors. If they change behavior, open conflict is often reduced, but groups may still dislike one another; the conflict simply becomes less visible as the groups are separated from one another.
Changing attitudes, on the other hand, often leads to fundamental changes in the ways that groups get along. However, it also takes considerably longer to accomplish than behavior change because it requires a fundamental change in social perceptions.
Maria, COO at Gordon’s Bike Company, acknowledges that they have two different pools of workers. One group is full-time, permanent workers who often have years of experience in manufacturing. The other group is part-time and temporary workers, many of whom are younger, and some of whom are working to help put their way through college.
These differences lead to a feeling of “us and them” by both groups. The full-time staff, with more seniority, better pay and benefits, and more job security, have some advantages over the part-timers. However, they feel that the part-timers often think the work (and therefore, their full-time colleagues) are beneath them—they discuss their plans after college, and more prestigious careers in their future. The temporary staff can feel this resentment.
Maria recognizes that both groups are bringing fundamental differences that are not easily remedied, but it still affects her ability to foster a positive work environment.
Nine conflict reduction strategies are shown below. The techniques should be viewed as a continuum, ranging from strategies that focus on changing behaviors near the top of the scale to strategies that focus on changing attitudes near the bottom of the scale. Let’s see how Maria might apply each of these to her problem.
| Strategy | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Physical separation | The quickest and easiest solution to conflict is physical separation. Separation is useful when conflicting groups are not working on a joint task or do not need a high degree of interaction. It may also help in the short term while a manager considers a better long-term solution. | Maria could arrange for work schedules to minimize actual contact between the two groups, with part-timers only working evenings and weekends. However, this would mean that the newer employees couldn’t learn from the more experienced workers. Moreover, she feels the separation will widen the gulf between them. |
| Use of rules and regulations | Conflict can also be reduced through the increasing specification of rules, regulations, and procedures. | Maria has considered stricter rules about how workers talk to and about each other, but such rules would be hard to enforce, and she thinks they would lower morale even further. |
| Limiting intergroup interaction | Another approach to reducing conflict is to limit intergroup interaction to issues involving common goals. Where groups agree on a goal, cooperation becomes easier. | Another consideration is the workgroups—Maria could have pods of like workers at each station, which would minimize how much interaction they have with other groups. Discussions between groups would be focused on the process and shared goals. Like the scheduling solution, she feels this will limit how much the newer workers could learn, and furthermore that disruptions in the assembly line might lead to more fighting between groups. |
| Use of integrators | Integrators are people assigned a boundary-spanning role between two groups or departments. To be trusted, integrators must be perceived by both groups as legitimate and knowledgeable. The integrator often takes the “shuttle diplomacy” approach, moving from one group to another, identifying areas of agreement, and attempting to find areas of future cooperation. | Maria wonders if she can work out the idea of “pods” assigned to stations, but with the workers who seem the most accepting of the other groups or span both groups serving as “diplomats” between groups. For example, she knows that Sally, a full-timer with a lot of experience, has a nephew, Steven, who works as a part-timer and is a student at the university. Both are outgoing and well liked. She could thus assign each of them to opposite groups to help build a bridge between the two groups. |
| Rotation of members | By rotating from one group to another, individuals come to understand the frames of reference, values, and attitudes of other members, and develop better intergroup relationships. | A later option Maria could try is building on the relationships Sally and Steven have built between the two groups and have others swap groups on a short-term basis. However, building relationships takes time, and the temporary and part-time workers have a lot of turnover. |
| Confrontation and negotiation | In this approach, competing parties are brought together face-to-face to discuss their basic areas of disagreement; this may be done with an outside facilitator. The hope is that through open discussion and negotiation, means can be found to work out problems. | If the conflict escalates, Maria may need to take a work break one day to gather everyone and address the conflict, even calling in a negotiator to help resolve the conflict. |
| Identification of interdependent tasks and superordinate goals | A further strategy for management is to establish goals that require groups to work together to achieve overall success—for example, when company survival is threatened. The threat of a shutdown often causes long-standing opponents to come together to achieve the common objective of keeping the company going. | Maria tries to remind workers that they have shared goals and objectives. However, this is less successful with her problem than it would be with two groups of full-time employees. After all, one source of conflict is that the temporary workers have less commitment (and less reason to commit) to the business. The prospect of a shutdown is less of a threat. |
| Use of intergroup training | The final technique on the continuum is intergroup training. Outside training experts are retained long-term to help groups develop relatively permanent mechanisms for working together. Structured workshops and training programs can help forge more favorable intergroup attitudes and more constructive intergroup behavior. | If a single training or workshop fails to get traction, Maria could consider ongoing training. As with other suggestions that move toward short-term sacrifices of time, effort, and money, it is less likely she’d do this, since there is so much turnover among one group. |
As you can see, there isn’t necessarily a single “best solution” for conflict resolution, and it will depend on the specific context of the conflict. If possible, managers should try to resolve conflict without such interventions, as long as they do not leave the conflict unaddressed.
Next, we’ll address some strategies to resolve individual or small group conflicts.
We’ve been addressing conflict between groups of people, but what about conflict that occurs between two people or a small group? Sometimes two people just can’t get along, and it may have more to do with personal differences than work. There are a few strategies that can be used when this occurs.
| Strategy | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Competing | A competing strategy is one where someone attempts to satisfy their own concerns without concern for the other. This strategy is rarely effective, especially if the relationship between the parties is important. This method focuses on getting your perspective and opinions accepted by the other. | Angela and Tom share a workspace in a flexible work environment, using the same cubicle and machine. Angela personalizes the space with photos and other decorations, which makes Tom feel less comfortable. Tom eats at the desk on the days he is in the office, and Angela complains about crumbs, crumpled napkins, and other messes Tom leaves behind. She leaves increasingly aggressive Post-it notes reminding him to clean up after himself. Instead, Tom intentionally makes more of a mess, angered by the notes and the feeling that Angela thinks the cubicle is rightfully hers. This is unlikely to end well. |
| Compromising | The compromising style means that in order to solve the conflict, both parties must give up something that is important to them. This can be effective for conflicts that need to be resolved quickly. However, there may be residual frustration for long-term conflicts, as neither party gets what they want. | If they were to compromise, Angela and Tom might agree to some rules like Angela clearing all but one or two decorations and Tom keeping the space tidy. It may or may not be effective, since Tom’s habits are hard to change and now neither like the space. |
| Collaborating | A collaborating style is assertive but also cooperative. This method involves trying to find a win-win situation for all parties involved. While this method may take more time, this style attempts to come to a resolution for all parties involved. | A step beyond compromising would be an evolving set of rules they continue to discuss until both are satisfied with the workspace. |
| Avoiding | In an avoiding style, the conflict is sidestepped and not addressed. This style of conflict management avoids conflict, in the hopes it will resolve itself. While this method may be useful for smaller conflicts, it is usually not effective in resolving issues, as frustration can build between the parties. | Instead of competing or raising the stakes, both workers might simply complain about the other behind their back and never address it directly. |
| Accommodating | In an accommodating style, a person accepts the perspective of the other party and acquiesces to their needs or wants. This style is effective if the relationship is important, and the person doesn’t care enough about the issue to “fight it.” | Similarly, if they genuinely like each other (perhaps knowing each other before the conflict), they might each accept the other’s differences. This is different from avoiding because there is no resentment. |
Source: This tutorial has been adapted from OPENSTAX “Organizational Behavior”. ACCESS FOR FREE AT https://openstax.org/books/organizational-behavior/pages/1-introduction. License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
