By: Yaw Osei-Aboagye

 
1.0 CONFLICT AND NEGOTIATIONS
 
BLOCK TWELVE OBJECTIVES

After completing Block Twelve, you should have a

good understanding of:

 Sources of conflict
 Various types of conflict
 Stages of conflict
 Management of conflict
 Effective negotiation strategies
The final characteristics of team process is conflict
which refers to antagonistic interaction in which one
party attempts to block the intentions or goals of
another (Daft and Marciczoo)

 An existing disagreement in a social situation that

emerges when the goals, interests, or value of
different individuals or groups are incompatible and
those individuals or groups block or thwart each
other’s attempts to achieve their objectives.
 Of all the skills required for effective team
management, none is more important than handling
the conflict that inevitably arise among members.
 Whenever people work together in teams, some
degree of conflict is inevitable and the management
of conflict is a skill that will enhance one’s ability to
be more effective in the workplace.
2.01 Incongruent Goals or Goal Difference
Conflict often occurs simply as a result of people
pursing conflicting goals. Examples interdepartmental
conflicts

2.02 Power and Status Difference

These occur when one party has disputable influence
over another.

2.03 Culture
Disintinct sets of values, beliefs and assumptions
within the same organization often foster conflict.
2.04 Task Interdependencies
Independencies among individuals, groups, teams and
departments do foster conflicts. For example where
one department delay the work of another
department to prevent them from meeting deadlines
 
2.05 Ambiguity
Conflicts emerge when job boundaries and
responsibilities are unclean or when rules are unclear.

2.06 Scarce Resource

Whenever, individuals or teams must compete for
scarce or declining resources conflict is almost
inevitable.
2.07 Communication Breakdown
Poor communication or communication
breakdowns result in misconception and
misunderstandings about and among other
people and teams.

2.08 Personality Clashes

When people simply do not get along with one
another and do not see eye-to-eye on any issue
clashes will occur. Personality clashes are
caused by basic differences in personality,
values and attitudes.
3.0 TYPES OF CONFLICT

3.01 Interpersonal Conflict

 
3.02 Intergroup Conflict

3.03 Intragroup

3.04 Inter organizational

Functional or constructive conflict
 It energies people toward high performance
because it can clarify goals and objectives.
 Conflict within teams can lead to better
decisions making when multiple view points
are considered. Some research suggests that
low conflict in top management teams is
associated with poor decision making.
 It leads to clear and progressive path of
action.
 It leads to poor productivity, low morale,
absenteeism, high staff turnover etc.

 It tears relationships apart and interfere with

the healthy exchange of ideas and
information.

 It burn-out employees energies

 4.01 Stages Of Conflict

 Conflict Antecedents
Simply conditions that lay the seeds for potential conflict

 Perceived Conflict
Perceived conflict emerges once individuals and groups
discover that their mandates are some what contradiction
 
 Felt Conflict
Identified when the conflict has surfaced and people start
vying for resources that might help achieve their
objectives.
Manifest Conflict
This exists when the conflict is out in the open.

Conflict suppression

Aftermath
Often the management of conflict can have
implication for future conflict.
4.1 Indirect Approaches to Conflict Management

Sometimes conflicting individuals and groups reach

resolution by confronting each other directly – or the
opposite, engaging in withdrawal and avoidance while
silently retaining their claims to resources or validation.
There is a range of less direct measures that may
mitigate or resolve a conflict. There are the principal
indirect approaches identified in the literature.

4.1.1 Reduced Interdependencies

 
We know that task and workflow interdependencies are
a very common source of conflict.
A number of techniques can reduce these
interdependencies to manage conflict:
 Decoupling – decoupling simply means reducing the
contact between the two parties. This might be
accomplished through job re-design, transfers, or a
redefined reporting structure.

 Buffering – buffering is one tactic that is available

when the inputs of one group or department are the
output of another. Should one group become
uncooperative or become unavailable to do the work,
then building an inventory is a type of buffering will
help to reduce the risk of a shortfall. This is not a
very popular choice because of the cost of inventory
storage.
 Linking pins – a linking pin is a person who acts as
a liaison between parties in an effort to help
create and sustain mutual objectives, a mutual
benefit or vision. This person is responsible for
keeping informed about departmental objectives
obstacles, members’ needs, etc.

4.1.2 Appeals to Common Goals or super odiniate

goals

 This is really about trying to champion both sides

(or in some cases many sides) around a common
vision. An again, this is the job of linking pin in
many cases, but can also be done with the help of
external consultants. What can all parties focus on
that will mobilize the energy in a similar or
common direction?
4.1.3 Hierarchical Referral

This is simply the act of referring the conflict to

someone higher in the hierarchy. What’s worse is that
sometimes the conflict management gets moved so
high up the hierarchy that the person at the top does
not know enough about the antecedents or causes of
the conflict to make an informed decision.

4.1.4 Altering Scripts and Myths

Sometimes, for example, managers try to manage

conflict through standard meetings. Yet, in reality this
approach rarely, if ever, seems to reduce serious
conflict.
As a result, this type of ritual ceases to be taken seriously
by participants.

4.2 Direct conflict Management

 
Teams as well as individuals develop specific styles for
dealing with conflict, based on the desire to satisfy their
own concern versus the other party’s concern. Five styles
of handling conflict can be seen in the model below.
 
The two major dimensions are the extent to which an
individual is assertive versus co-operative in his or her
approach to conflict. Effective team members vary their
style of handling conflict to fit a specific situation. Each
style is appropriate in certain cases.
 Assertive
Competing Collaborating

Assertiveness
(Attempting to
satisfy one’s own Compromising
concerns)

Avoiding Accommodating
Unassertive
Uncooperative Cooperative

Cooperativeness
(Attempting to satisfy the
other party’s concerns)
 Competing style – Reflects assertiveness to get
one’s own way and should be used when quick,
decisive action is vital on important issues or
unpopular actions, such as during emergencies or
urgent cost cutting.

 Avoiding style – Reflects neither assertiveness nor

cooperation and is appropriate when an issue is
trivial, when there is no chance of winning, when
a delay to gather more information is needed, or
when a disruption would be very costly.
 Compromising style – Reflects a moderate amount
of both assertiveness and cooperation and is
appropriate when the goals on both sides are
equally important, when opponents have equal
power and both sides want to split the difference,
or when people need to arrive at temporary or
expedient solution under time pressure.

 Accommodating style – Reflects a high degree of

cooperation and works best when people realize
they are wrong, when an issue is more important to
others than to oneself, when building social credits
for use in later discussions, and especially, when
maintaining harmony is important.
 Collaborating style – Reflects both a high
degree of assertiveness and cooperation. The
collaborating style enables both parties to
win although it may require substantial
bargaining and negotiation. The
collaborating style is important when both
sets of concerns are too important to be
compromised, when insights from different
people need to be merged into an overall
solution, and when the commitment of both
sides is needed for a consensus.
Definition
 
Negotiating is the art of coming to settlement
that is acceptable to the parities involved. It is
a two-way, win-lose game or win-win game. It
is a more formal means of achieving co-
operation thus parties engaging one another in
an attempt to systematically reach a solution.
That is negotiation uses bargaining to win
acceptance and approval.
Negotiation works well if the individuals can set aside
personal animosity and deal with the conflict in a
business like way. The aim of any negotiation is to
produce a settlement acceptable to both parties i.e. to
ensure both parties are satisfied by the exchange.
 
 
Types of negotiation

Negotiation can be internal and external

External Negotiation:
 
External Negotiation can be in the context of
external customer relations, as we buy and sell
products and services we negotiate.

Internal Negotiation

As we discuss terms and conditions of

employment we negotiate i.e. formal work
negotiating. We also have informal negotiating
like allocation of work and so on.
 Buyer

Win Lose

Win 1 2
Seller

Lose 3 4
Box 1. Here we have a mutually profitable bargain.
Both parties are winners. Both parties aim at
this goal and they all benefit. Repeat business
and satisfactory relationships should continue.
e.g. good quality at a reasonable price

Box 2. The seller wins, but the buyer loses. This may
be due to the imbalance of power between the
two or lack of choice in the short term. This
implies the customer feels cheated or
dissatisfied and it may cause him to leave for
another supplier in the long term. e.g. low
quality good at a high price.
  
Box 3. The buyer wins, but the seller loses. This
may also be due to the imbalance of power
between the two. For instance where the
seller lacks negotiation skills

Box 4. This is the worst scenario. Neither party

is happy with the exchange. Both parities
lose. For instances a low price may be
unsatisfactory to the seller but the resulting
low quality of product or service may fail to
satisfy the customer. This relationship is
doomed without re- negotiation or open
communication.
NEGOTIATIONS TACTICS

There are two primary negotiation tactics:

distributive negotiation and integrative negotiation.
 
 Distributive Negotiation

 Also referred to as ‘positive’ negotiation in that

each party has taken a position and believes that
they have to claim specific components of a ‘fixed
pie’ of resources. Also known as a zero-sum game
i.e. win-lose.
 Integrative Negotiation

With integrative negotiation, the parties do not

assume a zero-sum game; rather they focus their
attention and energy on how to best utilize the
resources, with a view to working toward a win-
win solution. Unlike distributive bargaining,
integrative bargaining is characterized by trust,
information sharing and the willingness and desire
to work toward a solution that is satisfactory for
all parties. The following are the types of
Integrative negotiation strategies:
  Separate The People From The Problem
You may have heard this expression before. It
becomes critical in a negotiation that the parties try
to focus on the substantive issue at hand rather than
the failings or weakness of the other party.

 Focus On Interest, Not Position

If we were to focus on position, which is the position
we have decided on, it is likely that we will ignore
the more important factor: the interest of the
parties. Interests are desires and concerns: they are
not what the parties want, but why they want a
specific outcome.
  Invent Options For Mutual Gain
Often parties in a negotiation assume that the
‘pie’ is fixed, and that it must be divided in such
a way that the parties get some portion of that.
However, if negotiators are creative, they might
Invent more options that enhance the number of
possible outcomes.

 Insist On Using Objective Criteria

NEGOTIATING STRATEGY
Successful negotiation depends on the following:
1. Preparation

i. Gathering information (facts from both

sides/customer views/complaints). The
greater the knowledge about the other party,
the greater will be a negotiator’s power and
their confidence during negotiation.

In essence you will need information on

companies or individuals you will be
negotiating with through:
  Written materials available via company report,
news papers journals etc and

 Personal contact between your organization and

the other party. The more relevant facts and
figures you have, the better place you are to
negotiate.

ii. Setting
objectives (desired outcomes),
anticipating likely problems/reactions on whom
are you dealing with (their position and
authority) Key steps in objective setting in
negotiation are:
 Clarity about what one wants to achieve
establishing the desired outcome of the negotiation
process e.g. resolution of the situation.
 Clarity about objectives covering personal
relationships
 Aim high
 Set specific measures of performance
 Remember the total picture
 Know what your bottom line is
 Anticipate the other party’s objectives, areas of
interest, and his response patterns
2. Negotiations – evidence of meeting

 Communication and negotiation skills, stating

case/clarifying issues, allowing room to
maneuver
 Style adopted (e.g. persuasive, problems
solving)
 Avoiding
 Agreeing courses of action, gaining
commitment reviews and establishing
feedback and evaluating mechanism.
 Listen more than you talk
 Ask positive questions
 Seek clarification
 Summarize understanding
 Signal unwillingness to move
 Listen hard for signals from the other side
DON’T:

 Interrupt
 Score points
 Attach
 Blame
 Be too clever
 Talk too much
 Shout down
 Threaten
 DON’T: Just state a grievance-propose a
remedy
 DO: propose rather than argue
 DO: make proposals conditional
 DON’T: give anything for nothing
 DO: Keep your options open
 DO: be assertive – Not aggressive
TEAM ROLES IN NEGOTIATIONS
CHARIMAN Co-ordinates team efforts
Set objectives and goals
Establishes contribution from others
Puts across views/positions/in
competitive/assertive
Skilled influences
MONITOR EVALUATOR
  Careful analyzing arguments
Places arguments within context
Provides arguments within context or
otherwise
PLANT
Problem solver
Thinks creatively
Asks “what if” questions

PROCESS CONSULTANTS:

Observes for behaviour/attitudes

Advises chairman on possible approaches