Conflict reduces team performance. However, a little bit of conflict is good. In fact, Duarte and Davies (2003) point out an optimum level of conflict, characterized by constructive debate, improved decisions and high performance. Being emotionally intelligent is critical for resolving conflict and effective negotiation. In order to do this, a leader needs to be able to see the situation from the other party's point of view. This is also known as perspective taking, defined as the cognitive process in which an individual adopts another person's view to better understand their preferences, values and needs.
Conflict is defined as the process that starts when one party perceives that he is negatively effected by another party. Conflict depends on perception. It does not always line up with reality.
There are three sources of organizational conflict:
- Substantive conflict: this occurs when people have different opinions on key issues in the organization that effect them.
- Affective conflict: a type of conflict that engenders strong emotions, such as anger or disgust. This may be due to personality differences or arguments.
- Process conflict: sometimes, people disagree about the course of action to pursue, or the best way to operate even after a decision has been made. Process conflict reduces team performance.
Some specific examples of where conflict in organizations may originate are personality (differences), sensitivity or hurt, differences in perception and values, differences about facts, differences about goals and priorities, differences over methods, competition for scarce resources, competition for supremacy, misunderstanding and unfulfilled expectations.
Conflict isn't always a bad thing. In fact, Duarte and Davies (2003) found that there is a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and performance. They pointed out an optimum level of conflict, characterized by constructive debate, improved decisions and high performance. On the other hand, too little conflict is characterized by apathy and poor performance. Too much conflict is characterized by disruption and poor performance.
Task versus relationship conflict
Task conflict focuses on the importance to keep in mind that the organization's goals and ensuring that unproductive conflict is resolved before it harms performance. On the other hand, relationship conflict focusses on the relationship between employees. Both conflicts have an impact on team performance. The more that team members identify with the goals of the teams, the less relationship conflict they experience. Also, regulating emotions may keep the conflict focused on the task so that it is not perceived as a personal attack on others. Mindfulness can also help constructive conflict resolution by increasing collaboration and reducing avoidance.
Workplace incivility and aggression
Workplace incivility is defined as low-intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target, in violation with workplace norms about mutual respect. It can have lasting impacts on organizational members, so leaders should protect employees from repeated acts of incivility.
Workplace aggression is defined as overt physical or nonphysical behavior that harms others at work.
Abusive supervision and toxic workplaces
Sources of workplace incivility and aggression are abusive supervision and toxic organizational cultures. Some supervisors engage in hostile behavior known as abusive supervision. This can be source of stress, anxiety, and emotional exhaustion for employees. Even when they are not the target and other employees are being abused, they may be affected.
Also, deviant behavior of coworkers is a source of stress for other employees. This may include: aggression, bullying, harassment, incivility and social undermining. Deviant behavior affects others in three ways:
- Direct effects: the employee is the target.
- Indirect effects: the employee is affected by learning of another coworker's deviant behaviors.
- Ambient impact: collective deviant behavior creates a hostile working environment or toxic workplaces.
Workplace violence
Most aggression experienced by employees is caused by unhappy clients or customers. Leaders can engage in effective conflict resolution to avoid escalation of conflict into workplace incivility or aggression.
Conflict resolution can be seen as two dimensions in a space that reflect possible outcomes for handling interpersonal conflict. Those two dimensions are concern for self (high or low) and concern for others (high or low). Based on these dimensions, the following five conflict resolution styles are found:
- Integrating: high concern for self; high concern for others.
- Obliging: low concern for self; high concern for others.
- Dominating: high concern for self; low concern for others.
- Avoiding: low concern for self; low concern for others.
- Compromising: in the middle; average concern for self; average concern for others.
It depends on the situation whether a style is appropriate or not. For instance, a leader with a obliging style will have a predisposition toward giving in to the demands of others and neglecting his or her own concerns. This may be appropriate when issues are complex or when one party alone cannot solve the problem. However, it is inappropriate when the task or problem is simple, when immediate decisions are required and when other parties do not have problem-solving skills. Styles like dominating and avoiding are appropriate when the issue is trivial, yet they are inappropriate when the issue is complex or not important to you.
Team conflicts produces stress and arguments that distract the team from working on the task and thus harms performance. All types of conflict (task, relationship, and process) are detrimental to member satisfaction. However, moderate levels of task conflict actually improve team performance because it simulates information exchange among team members. Task conflict and differences of opinion may improve decision quality by forcing members to see other viewpoints and think in a creative manner. Effective teamwork results in higher performance when task conflicts exists, and this is particularly true when team members trust one another.
Another study found that teams improve or maintain top performance over time when they engage in the following three conflict resolution strategies:
- They focus on the content of interactions instead of on the delivery style.
- They explicitly discuss reasons behind any decisions when distributing work assignments.
- They assign work to members who have the relevant task experience instead of assigning by other common means such as volunteering, default, or convenience.
Research has shown that conflict resolution style may differ by culture. In order to work on resolving conflict with a person from another culture, one requires knowledge of cultural differences. The following guidelines have been suggested for resolving cross-cultural conflict (ranked in order of importance):
- Be a good listener.
- Be sensitive to the needs of others.
- Be cooperative instead of overly competitive.
- Advocate inclusive (participative) leadership.
- Compromise rather than dominate.
- Build rapport through conversations.
- Be compassionate and understanding.
- Avoid conflict by emphasizing harmony.
- Nurture others: develop and mentor.
When a leader intervenes to resolve a conflict it is called facilitation. Before engaging in facilitation, leaders should ask the following question in their attempt to resolve a conflict:
- Is intervention necessary or appropriate?
- If so, what type of intervention is most appropriate?
- Is the leader the appropriate person to intervene?
- If not, should the services of an independent resource person be provided? If so, how might the leader make use of the resource person?
If the answer to the third question is no, then the leader needs to consider other options to resolve the conflict by bringing in an independent resource person. Such methods to resolve conflict that both parties agree to without involving litigation, are known as alternative dispute resolution. Examples of such methods are: approaching an ombudsperson, a peer review process, conciliation, or mediation. In arbitration, both parties agree in advance to accept the decision, and it is made by a neutral third party.
Negotiation is one of the key applications of conflict resolution techniques. In consists of the following seven steps:
- Background research
- Preparation
- Build rapport
- Ask questions
- Offers and counteroffers
- Agreement
- Implementation
- Impasse
There are two general types of negation: distributive and integrative.
Distributive bargaining is characterized by the negotiator approaching the process as a zero-sum game. To put it differently, one person gains at the expense of the other. The possible outcomes are viewed as a fixed pie, meaning that there is a limited amount of goods to be divided, and the goal is to get the largest share. Each negotiator has a purpose, or target point, of what they want to get from the bargaining process. They may also have a best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA). One should use the following guidelines in making the first offer:
- Be confident in your speech and demeanor.
- Be precise.
- Avoid ranges.
- Be aggressive but realistic.
Integrative bargaining is different from distributive bargaining on one key aspect: they parties do not see the process as a zero-sum game. They believe that and agreement can be reached that satisfies all parties. The possible outcomes are viewed as an expanding pie in which a win-win solution can be reached.
The four pillars (according to Fisher and Ury) or interest-based negotiation are:
- Focus on interests and not of positions.
- Imagine a wide range of solutions before making a decisions. Explore solutions providing a mutual benefit.
- Resolve disputes and choose solutions based on objective criteria to which everyone agrees.
- Distinctly address people issues and substantive issues.
The effect of emotions and culture on negotiation
It is important to keep negative emotions in check, because they increase dysfunctional competition. However, emotions reveal useful information about the counterparty's motivations and interests and may influence the outcome. Positive emotions result in more cooperative negotiation strategies, increase creative problem-solving, less hostility and reduced deception.
Culture also influences negotiation styles. For example, negotiators from the Middle East tent to be more relationship-oriented and negotiators in Costa Rica were more likely to build relationships through the expression of emotions.
A leader needs to be able to see the situation form the other party's point of view, called perspective taking. There are two reasons why perspective taking helps resolve conflict:
- People are more likely to create a social bond with the other person.
- It creates positive attributions about another person's behavior.
