THEORIES OF CONFLICT

Different Theories on Conflict

By Brittany McComas, eHow Contributor

The theory of conflict is timeless, yet conflict changes with time.

Some define conflict as a struggle for social status, or for scarce resources. Conflict even arises in the form of communication. Conflict in communication is functional when norms and values of the culture are stable, and individual opinions and viewpoints are respected; however, conflict is dysfunctional when it becomes emotionally charged. With the scope of violence and technology changing dramatically in the twentieth century, knowledge of conflict different theories has increased considerably.

Other People Are Reading

How to Explain Conflict Perspective

Consensus Vs. Conflict Theory

Print this article

1. Emotional Conflict
o

People's aspirations and gratifications can be a host for conflict. Hostility, for instance, in rational or non-rational behavior has a much bigger role than incompatible differences in terms of conflict. In hostility, it no longer remains that two parties have incompatible differences or goals; it also implies both parties have resistance toward the other party's

thought or principle. Rational behavior promotes a compromise of outcome. One must determine possible outcomes, payoffs of each outcome and then determine the suitable outcome for both parties. Non-rational behavior warrants a specific goal of one party, and intention to maintain that goal can get carried away by hostile emotions.

Social Conflict
o

The German theorist and political activist, Karl Marx, developed a theory that emphasizes a materialistic view of history and a more critical stance toward existing social arrangements within political and economic structures of society. The Marxist view is on the materialist premise that the most important determining factor of social life is the people's labor that provides basic necessities of life such as food, clothing and shelter. Marx thought that the social organization within labor has a strong impact on all aspects of society, and maintained that everything of value in society is a result of human labor. Karl Marx's view was that working men and women create their own existence.

Technological and Scientific Conflict

o

One theory of conflict involves the impact of technological and scientific progress on social interaction within history and the homo sapien future, forcing the homo sapien to live in confusion. Scientific knowledge and inventions can lead to weak family ties that cripple social mobility because of a lack of physical communication. The quality of life, satisfaction and life standards are lowered, leading to such things as a high divorce rate. A better life through science and technology has actually increased conflict in many areas of the world under the principle of change as "modernization" or "post-modernization."

Read more: Different Theories on Conflict | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_7620438_different-theoriesconflict.html#ixzz25UjT4OJc

Conflict theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sociology

Outline

Theory History

Positivism Antipositivism Functionalism Conflict theory Middle-range Mathematical Critical theory Socialization Structure and agency

Research methods

Quantitative Qualitative Historical Computational Ethnographic Network analytic

Topics Subfields

Cities Class Crime Culture Deviance Demography Education Economy Environment Family Gender Health Industry Internet Knowledge Law Medicine Politics Mobility Race and ethnicity Rationalization Religion Science Secularization Social networks Social psychology Stratification

Browse Portal Category tree Lists Journals Sociologists Article index


Contents
[hide]

1 In classical sociology 2 Modern approaches 3 Types of conflict theory 4 See also 5 References

[edit]In

classical sociology

Of the classical founders of social science, conflict theory is most commonly associated with Karl Marx (1818 1883). Based on a dialectical materialistaccount of history, Marxism posited that capitalism, like previous socioeconomic systems, would inevitably produce internal tensions leading to its own destruction.[1] Marx ushered in radical change, advocating proletarian revolution and freedom from the ruling classes. At the same time, Karl Marx was aware that most of the people living in capitalist societies did not see how the system shaped the entire operation of society. Just like how we see private property, or the right to pass that property on to our children as natural, many of members in capitalistic societies see the rich as having earned their wealth through hard work and education, while seeing the poor as lacking in skill and initiative. Marx rejected this type of thinking and termed it false consciousness,explanations of social problems as the shortcomings of individuals rather than the flaws of society. Marx wanted to replace this kind of thinking with something he termed class consciousness, workers' recognition of themselves as a class unified in opposition to capitalist and ultimately to the capitalist system itself. In general, Marx wanted the proletarians to rise up against the capitalist and overthrow the capitalist system.[2]
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary re-constitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes. Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels The Communist Manifesto 1848,
[3]

In the social productions of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social

consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then an era of social revolution begins. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure. In studying such transformations it is always necessary to distinguish between the material transformation of the economic conditions of production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and the legal, political, religious, artistic or philosophic in short, ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it out. Just as one does not judge an individual by what he thinks about himself, so one cannot judge such a period of transformation by its consciousness, but, on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained from the contradictions of material life, from the conflict existing between the social forces of production and the relations of production. No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society. Mankind thus inevitably sets itself only such tasks as it is able to solve, since closer examination will always show that the problem itself arises only when the material conditions for its solution are already present or at least in the course of formation. In broad outline, the Asiatic, ancient, [A] feudal and modern bourgeois modes of production may be designated as epochs marking progress in the economic development of society. The bourgeois mode of production is the last antagonistic form of the social process of production antagonistic not in the sense of individual antagonism but of an antagonism that emanates from the individuals' social conditions of existence but the productive forces developing within bourgeois society create also the material conditions for a solution of this antagonism. The prehistory of human society accordingly closes with this social formation. Karl Marx A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy 1859,
[4]

Two early conflict theorists were the Polish-Austrian sociologist and political theorist Ludwig Gumplowicz (18381909) and the American sociologist and paleontologist Lester F. Ward (18411913). Although Ward and Gumplowicz developed their theories independently they had much in common and approached conflict from a comprehensive anthropological and evolutionary point-of-view as opposed to Marx's rather exclusive focus on economic factors. Gumplowicz, in Grundriss der Soziologie (Outlines of Sociology, 1884), describes how civilization has been shaped by conflict between cultures and ethnic groups. Gumplowicz theorized that large complex human societies evolved from the war and conquest. Another organizes states around the domination of one group: masters and slaves. Eventually a complex caste system develops.[5] Horowitz says that Gumplowicz

understood conflict in all its forms: "class conflict, race conflict and ethnic conflict", and calls him one of the fathers of Conflict Theory.[6]
What happened in India, Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome may sometime happen in modern Europe. European civilization may perish, over flooded by barbaric tribes. But if any one believes that we are safe from such catastrophes he is perhaps yielding to an all too optimistic delusion. There are no barbaric tribes in our neighbourhood to be sure but let no one be deceived, their instincts lie latent in the populace of European states. Gumplowicz (1884),
[7]

Ward directly attacked and attempted to systematically refute the elite business class's laissez-faire philosophy as espoused by the hugely popular social philosopher Herbert Spencer. Ward'sDynamic Sociology (1883) was an extended thesis on how to reduce conflict and competition in society and thus optimize human progress. At the most basic level Ward saw human nature itself to be deeply conflicted between self-aggrandizement and altruism, between emotion and intellect, and between male and female. These conflicts would be then reflected in society and Ward assumed there had been a "perpetual and vigorous struggle" among various "social forces" that shaped civilization.[8][9] Ward was more optimistic than Marx and Gumption and believed that it was possible to build on and reform present social structures with the help of sociological analysis. Durkheim (18581917) saw society as a functioning organism. Functionalism concerns "the effort to impute, as rigorously as possible, to each feature, custom, or practice, its effect on the functioning of a supposedly stable, cohesive system,"[10] The chief form of social conflict that Durkheim addressed was crime. Durkheim saw crime as "a factor in public health, an integral part of all healthy societies."[11] The collective conscience defines certain acts as "criminal." Crime thus plays a role in the evolution of morality and law: "[it] implies not only that the way remains open to necessary changes but that in certain cases it directly prepares these changes." [12] Weber's (18641920) approach to conflict is contrasted with that of Marx. While Marx focused on the way individual behavior is conditioned by social structure, Weber emphasized the importance of "social action," i.e., the ability of individuals to affect their social relationships.[13]

[edit]Modern

approaches

C. Wright Mills has been called the founder of modern conflict theory.[14] In Mills's view, social structures are created through conflict between people with differing interests and resources. Individuals and resources, in turn, are influenced by these structures and by the "unequal distribution of power and resources in the society."[14] The power elite of American society, (i.e., themilitaryindustrial complex) had "emerged from the fusion of the corporate elite, the Pentagon, and the executive branch of government." Mills argued that the interests of this elite were opposed to those of the people. He theorized that the policies of the power elite would result in "increased escalation of conflict, production of weapons of mass destruction, and possibly the annihilation of the human race."[14]

Gene Sharp (born 21 January 1928) is a Professor Emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth.[15] He is known for his extensive writings on nonviolent struggle, which have influenced numerous anti-government resistance movements around the world. In 1983 he founded the Albert Einstein Institution, a non-profit organization devoted to studies and promotion of the use of nonviolent action in conflicts worldwide.[16] Sharp's key theme is that power is not monolithic; that is, it does not derive from some intrinsic quality of those who are in power. For Sharp, political power, the power of any stateregardless of its particular structural organizationultimately derives from the subjects of the state. His fundamental belief is that any power structure relies upon the subjects' obedience to the orders of the ruler(s). If subjects do not obey, leaders have no power. Sharp has been called both the "Machiavelli of nonviolence" and the "Clausewitz of nonviolent warfare."[17] Sharp's scholarship has influenced resistance organizations around the world. Most recently the protest movement that toppled President Mubarak of Egypt drew extensively on his ideas, as well as the youth movement in Tunisia and the earlier ones in the Eastern European color revolutions that had previously been inspired by Sharp's work.[18] A recent articulation of conflict theory is found in Alan Sears' (Canadian sociologist) book A Good Book, in Theory: A Guide to Theoretical Thinking (2008):[19]

Societies are defined by inequality that produces conflict, rather than which produces order and consensus. This conflict based on inequality can only be overcome through a fundamental transformation of the existing relations in the society, and is productive of new social relations.

The disadvantaged have structural interests that run counter to the status quo, which, once they are assumed, will lead to social change. Thus, they are viewed as agents of change rather than objects one should feel sympathy for.

Human potential (e.g., capacity for creativity) is suppressed by conditions of exploitation and oppression, which are necessary in any society with an unequal division of labour. These and other qualities do not necessarily have to be stunted due to the requirements of the so-called "civilizing process," or "functional necessity": creativity is actually an engine for economic development and change.

The role of theory is in realizing human potential and transforming society, rather than maintaining the power structure. The opposite aim of theory would be the objectivity and detachment associated with positivism, where theory is a neutral, explanatory tool.

Consensus is a euphemism for ideology. Genuine consensus is not achieved, rather the more powerful in societies are able to impose their conceptions on others and have them accept theirdiscourses. Consensus does not preserve social order, it entrenches stratification, e.g., the American dream.

The State serves the particular interests of the most powerful while claiming to represent the interests of all. Representation of disadvantaged groups in State processes may cultivate the notion of full participation, but this is an illusion/ideology.

Inequality on a global level is characterized by the purposeful underdevelopment of Third World countries, both during colonization and after national independence. The global system (i.e., development agencies such as World Bank and International Monetary Fund) benefits the most powerful countries and multinational corporations, rather than the subjects of development, through economic, political, and military actions.

Although Sears associates the conflict theory approach with Marxism, he argues that it is the foundation for much "feminist, post-modernist, anti-racist, and lesbian-gay liberationist theories."[20]

[edit]Types

of conflict theory

Conflict theory is most commonly associated with Marxism, but as a reaction to functionalism and the positivist method may also be associated with number of other perspectives, including:

Critical theory Feminist theory: The advocacy of social equality for women and men, in opposition to patriarchy and sexism.[21]

Postmodern theory: An approach that is critical of modernism, with a mistrust of grand theories and ideologies.[21]

Post-structural theory Postcolonial theory Queer theory: A growing body of research findings that challenges the heterosexual bias in Western society.[21]

World systems theory Race-Conflict Approach: A point of view that focuses on inequality and conflict between people of different racial and ethnic categories.[21]

[edit]See

also

Game theory Social defeat Social-conflict theory Sociology of peace, war, and social conflict Structural functionalism Conflict Management

[edit]References

1.

^ Baird, Forrest E.; Walter Kaufmann (2008). From Plato to Derrida. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-158591-6.

2. 3.

^ Macionis, J. J. (2011). Society. Sociology (7th ed., pp. 88-89). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. ^ Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto, introduction by Martin Malia (New York: Penguin group, 1998), pg. 35 ISBN 0-451-52710-0

4.

^ Marx A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

^ Fifty Key Sociologists: the Formative Theorists, John Scott Irving, 2007, pg 59 ^ "Communicating Ideas: The Politics of Scholarly Publishing", Irving Louis Horowitz, 1986, pg 281 ^ "Outlines of Sociology", pg 196 ^ "Transforming Leadership", James MacGregor Burns, 2004, pg 189 ^ "German Realpolitik and American Sociology: an Inquiry Into the Sources and Political Significance of the Sociology of Conflict", James Alfred Aho, 1975, ch. 6 'Lester F. Ward's Sociology of Conflict'

10. ^ Bourricaud, F. 'The Sociology of Talcott Parsons' Chicago University Press. ISBN 0-226-06756-4. p. 94 11. ^ Durkheim, E. (1938). The Rules of Sociological Method. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. p. 67. 12. ^ Durkheim, (1938), pp. 7081. 13. ^ Livesay, C. Social Inequality: Theories: Weber. Sociology Central. A-Level Sociology Teaching Notes. Retrieved on: 2010-06-20. 14. ^
a b c

Knapp, P. (1994). One World Many Worlds: Contemporary Sociological Theory (2nd Ed.).

Harpercollins College Div, pp. 228246. Online summary ISBN 978-0-06-501218-7 15. ^ "Gene Sharp: Author of the nonviolent revolution rulebook". BBC News. 21 February 2011. 16. ^ Gene Sharp biography at Albert Einstein Institution web site. 17. ^ Weber, Thomas. Gandhi as Disciple and Mentor. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2004
[page needed]

18. ^ "Shy U.S. Intellectual Created Playbook Used in a Revolution". The New York Times. 16 February 2011. 19. ^ Sears, Alan. (2008) A Good Book, In Theory: A Guide to Theoretical Thinking. North York: Higher Education University of Toronto Press, pg. 34-6. 20. ^ Sears, pg. 36. 21. ^
a b c d

Macionis, J., and Gerber, L. (2010). Sociology, 7th edition

Stark, Rodney (2007). Sociology (10th ed.). thomas wadsworth. ISBN 0-495-09344-0. Lenski, Gerhard E. (1966). Power and Privilege: A Theory of Social Stratificaion. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07037165-2.

Collins, Randall (1994). Four Sociological Traditions: Selected Readings. Oxford University Press.. ISBN 0-19508702-X.

Thio, Alex (2008). Sociology: A Brief Introduction (7th ed.). Pearson. ISBN 0-205-40785-4.

CONFLICT THEORY

The several social theories that emphasize social conflict have roots in the ideas ofKarl Marx (1818-1883), the great German theorist and political activist. The Marxist, conflict approach emphasizes a materialist interpretation of history, a dialectical method of analysis, a critical stance toward existing social arrangements, and a political program of revolution or, at least, reform. The materialist view of history starts from the premise that the most important determinant of social life is the work people are doing, especially work that results in provision of the basic necessities of life, food, clothing and shelter. Marx thought that the way the work is socially organized and the technology used in production will have a strong impact on every other aspect of society. He maintained that everything of value in society results from human labor. Thus, Marx saw working men and women as engaged in making society, in creating the conditions for their own existence. Marx summarized the key elements of this materialist view of history as follows: In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness (Marx 1971:20). Marx divided history into several stages, conforming to broad patterns in the economic structure of society. The most important stages for Marx's argument were feudalism,capitalism, and socialism. The bulk of Marx's writing is concerned with applying the materialist model of society to capitalism, the stage of economic and social development that Marx saw as dominant in 19th century Europe. For Marx, the central institution of capitalist society is private property, the system by

which capital (that is, money, machines, tools, factories, and other material objects used in production) is controlled by a small minority of the population. This arrangement leads to two opposed classes, the owners of capital (called the bourgeoisie) and the workers (called theproletariat), whose only property is their own labor time, which they have to sell to the capitalists. Owners are seen as making profits by paying workers less than their work is worth and, thus, exploiting them. (In Marxist terminology, material forces of production ormeans of production include capital, land, and labor, whereas social relations of production refers to the division of labor and implied class relationships.) Economic exploitation leads directly to political oppression, as owners make use of their economic power to gain control of the state and turn it into a servant of bourgeois economic interests. Police power, for instance, is used to enforce property rights and guarantee unfair contracts between capitalist and worker. Oppression also takes more subtle forms: religion serves capitalist interests by pacifying the population; intellectuals, paid directly or indirectly by capitalists, spend their careers justifying and rationalizing the existing social and economic arrangements. In sum, the economic structure of society molds the superstructure, including ideas (e.g., morality, ideologies, art, and literature) and the social institutions that support the class structure of society (e.g., the state, the educational system, the family, and religious institutions). Because the dominant or ruling class (the bourgeoisie) controls the social relations of production, the dominant ideology in capitalist society is that of the ruling class. Ideology and social institutions, in turn, serve to reproduce and perpetuate the economic class structure. Thus, Marx viewed the exploitative economic arrangements of capitalism as the real foundation upon which the superstructure of social, political, and intellectual consciousness is built. (Figure 1 depicts this model of historical materialism.) Marx's view of history might seem completely cynical or pessimistic, were it not for the possibilities of change revealed by his method of dialectical analysis. (The Marxistdialectical method, based on Hegel's earlier idealistic dialectic, focuses attention on how an existing social arrangement, or thesis, generates its social opposite, orantithesis, and on how a qualitatively different social form, or synthesis, emerges from the resulting struggle.) Marx was an optimist. He believed that any stage of history based on exploitative economic arrangements generated within itself the seeds of its own destruction. For instance, feudalism, in which land owners exploited the peasantry, gave rise to a class of town-dwelling merchants, whose dedication to making profits eventually led to the bourgeois revolution and the modern capitalist era. Similarly, the class relations of capitalism will lead inevitably to the next stage, socialism. The class relations of capitalism embody a contradiction:

capitalists need workers, and vice versa, but the economic interests of the two groups are fundamentally at odds. Such contradictions mean inherent conflict and instability, the class struggle. Adding to the instability of the capitalist system are the inescapable needs for ever-wider markets and ever-greater investments in capital to maintain the profits of capitalists. Marx expected that the resulting economic cycles of expansion and contraction, together with tensions that will build as the working class gains greater understanding of its exploited position (and thus attains class consciousness), will eventually culminate in a socialist revolution. Despite this sense of the unalterable logic of history, Marxists see the need for social criticism and for political activity to speed the arrival of socialism, which, not being based on private property, is not expected to involve as many contradictions and conflicts as capitalism. Marxists believe that social theory and political practice are dialectically intertwined, with theory enhanced by political involvement and with political practice necessarily guided by theory. Intellectuals ought, therefore, to engage inpraxis, to combine political criticism and political activity. Theory itself is seen as necessarily critical and value-laden, since the prevailing social relations are based uponalienating and dehumanizing exploitation of the labor of the working classes. Marx's ideas have been applied and reinterpreted by scholars for over a hundred years, starting with Marx's close friend and collaborator, Friedrich Engels (1825-95), who supported Marx and his family for many years from the profits of the textile factories founded by Engels' father, while Marx shut himself away in the library of the British Museum. Later, Vladimir I. Lenin (1870-1924), leader of the Russian revolution, made several influential contributions to Marxist theory. In recent years Marxist theory has taken a great variety of forms, notably the world-systems theory proposed by Immanuel Wallerstein (1974, 1980) and the comparative theory of revolutions put forward by Theda Skocpol (1980). Marxist ideas have also served as a starting point for many of the modern feminist theorists. Despite these applications, Marxism of any variety is still a minority position among American sociologists.

References Marx, Karl. 1971. Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Tr. S. W. Ryanzanskaya, edited by M. Dobb. London: Lawrence & Whishart. Skocpol, Theda. 1980. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wallerstein, Immanuel M. 1974. The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press. . 1980. The Modern World-System II: Mercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World-Economy, 1600-1750. New York: Academic Press.

CONFLICT THEORY & THE FAMILY

Dec 29, 2010 | By Linda Ray

Photo Credit Jupiterimages/Comstock/Getty Images Conflict theory addresses the way in which people within a unit struggle for power, how they disagree and what actions they take to compete for resources. Prestige and wealth often form the basis for the most intense competitions. Instead of buying into the myth that all families are harmonious entities, conflict theory challenges those assumptions to examine the ways in which family members struggle, according to California State University.

BASICS

The theory of conflict within families starts with the premise that family members undergo conflicts and disharmony. The study includes family dynamics and the roles played by various family members. The source of the power and the causes of the conflict must be identified. Included in the conflict theory as it applies to the family is the uncovering of how the family deals with changes and adversity.

Keys to a Happy Marriage Almost every marriage starts out as a huge celebration. But ends up... www.thoughtsabout-god.com Sponsored Links

SIGNIFICANCE
When the family is dissected and sources of conflict and power identified, the family then can find better and more effective ways to communicate. Understanding can lead to a desire for change and motivate family members to participate to develop more positive relationships. Through the study of the family

dynamics, members may become more empathic and understanding of the underlying causes of their conflict.

EFFECTS
According to California State University, it is not possible to interact with other human beings without eventual conflict. Growth takes place within the context of conflict. Change and the ensuing conflicts it brings are normal and necessary for human growth and development. The primary goal should be for family members to learn how to manage the conflict so that it doesn't escalate and alienate others and lead to estranged relationships.

FEATURES
Among the resources that present conflicts in families are time and money. Family members concerned with self-interest alone see a scarcity of both and present conflicting ideas of how each should be spent to make sure they receive their due. Love, affection, power to make decisions and knowledge also are commodities seen as scarce resources. Conflict negotiations highlight these needs and agree they exist.

RESOLUTIONS
Once the family understands the complexities of their motivations and intent, it can find resolutions, according to the University of Akron. Families can learn to express their feelings in a safe environment where each member receives a certain amount of uninterrupted time to talk. Ground rules may be set that discourage raised voices or physical acts. Discussion remains focused on each issue and does not turn to personal attacks. Each family member must believe that a solution is possible and then participate in finding it. Hindsight then can be used to settle future conflicts.

Conflict Styles Trainers Powerful dashboard to manage users as they take online
inventory. www.RiverhouseEpress.com

Sermon Series Download your favorite sermon series online now. Be inspired! www.PreachIt.org/Sermon-Series Keep Your Brain Young Sharpen Your Memory With Brain Games Made By Neuroscientists www.lumosity.com Real Estate in Dubai British-Owned Developer offering Luxury Apartments in amazing
Dubai! www.TheFirstGroup.com/Dubai Sponsored Links

REFERENCES
California State University: Conflict Theory University of Akron: Family Crisis

Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/345499-conflict-theory-the-family/#ixzz25UkHHLS0

Conflict Theory

What Is the Purpose of Conflict Theory?

Conflict theory pertains to the differing ways that both individuals and communities grouped by social and economic class, use, abuse or are victimized by power relations. Sociologists, psychologists, labor and human rights organizers, academics and critics all utilize conflict theory to discuss and study how a class system affects various social interactions.

Criminology Study Techniques

Criminology is the study of crime and its relation to society. Considered an interdisciplinary field, criminologists can work for the government, private organizations and in universities. The research they do in studying criminals affect social law, crime rates and government projects regarding law enforcement. When studying criminology, the four basic study techniques include data sources, causes of crime, statistical interpretation of crimes and analysis.

Varieties of Conflict Theory

Marxist historical materialism emphasizes the relationship between men and materials, particularly focusing on how this creates a natural division between laborers and those who profit from the labor. The original social conflict theories take this basic assumption and extrapolate the typical divisions of society, based on myriad factors.

Introduction to Criminology
The scientific study of criminal behavior is called criminology. Criminologists study both the causes of crime and possible solutions to the problem of crime. There are a number of different theories in criminology, based on different models of why criminals do the things they do. These include the classical theory, the positivist theory and others.

How to Compare & Contrast Functionalist & Conflict Theories

Social scientists often look at the world through the spectacles of a particular ideology, or belief system. This makes a very complex world easier to understand. It also provides a framework for students to learn about the social and political world and the theories that have influenced people's thinking. Both the functionalist and conflict theories have their adherents and both have something to offer in trying to understand politics and even decide political allegiance. These theories not only address the world of politics, but also many other areas of life, including, crime, education and economics.

How to Apply Sociological Theory to Topics

Sociological theory is a collection of interrelated ideas that concentrate on the systematic study of the social world. The use of sociological theory combines the application of the method with a collection of sociological observations and understandings to form a unique field of human analysis that is largely focused with group behavior, social understanding and the nature of people as social creatures. Sociological theory provides a

foundation to understand why people associate with groups and even predict their reactions to various opposing ideas that are counter to their group identity.

Conflict That May Arise With Diverse Social Groups

Diversity allows individuals to learn about the cultural, religious or social ideals of others. Unfortunately, conflict can arise from this diversity, either through inherited ideals in your children, rhetoric-fueled media or an unhealthy avoidance of important social ideas. Some conflict can be turned positive, if you know how to address it when the situation occurs.

Differences Between Globalization and Internationalization

Although the terms "globalization" and "internationalization" are sometimes used interchangeably to describe economic, political and or cultural activities throughout the world, there are several key differences between the two words. The term globalization is consistently utilized to describe the dramatic changes the world is undergoing, as new technology and modern economics have led to increasingly interconnected economies and cultures; internationalization more often refers to specific, economic activities certain firms or nations are undertaking internationally.

What Are the Causes of Intrastate Conflict?

Intrastate conflict is the technical name for armed conflicts that occur within the borders of a state. One common example for an intrastate conflict is a civil war; however, not all intrastate conflicts come down to secessionism. In fact, entire academic and government organizations, such as Harvard University's Belfer Center, study how and why intrastate conflicts occur throughout the world. Such conflicts are usually complex and are not caused by one thing. Instead, multiple reasons may explain any intrastate conflict.

Ways to Prevent Conflict

Preventing a conflict often starts with deciding to compromise on final decisions. While conflict is natural and sometimes constructive, reacting poorly to conflict can lead to dangerous problems. However, the method a group or individual has for addressing or avoiding a conflict can itself lead to serious conflicts that halt progress.

Models of Conflict
Conflict is a feature of human society that takes many forms, from disagreements between individuals to global wars. Conflict occurs within small groups, within societies and between societies, and is caused by a complex range of factors that are not fully comprehended. Social scientists seek to understand the causes of conflict by constructing theoretical models about its origins.

Intercultural Conflict Styles

Just like any other situation, the rules for the polite way to handle problems are specific to a particular culture. The way that different cultures deal with conflict is largely based on the context of the culture. Cultural context is a concept developed by Edward T. Hall, a cultural anthropologist who developed several cultural dimensions to help explain differences between cultures. The concept of context has to do with how much information a person in a culture overtly states, and how much is encoded in the context of the situation.

What Were the Causes of Conflict With the Phoenicians?

The greatest assets of the Phoenicians were their greatest liabilities and the cause of conflicts with other nations. Although Phoenicia developed a powerful empire in the first millennium B.C. it was a mercantile empire and never one that was extended by military power. The Phoenicians had little tradition of warfare. Their country was located in the area now comprised by Lebanon and parts of Syria and Israel.

What Underlies Conflict?

The many reasons people become conflicted often are personal, such as a quest for better self-understanding or whether to change jobs. The root lies in the Latin word "conflictus," meaning to strike together or clash. Conflict in the form of battles and wars are often caused by competing interests and a fight for power.

How to Apply Conflict Theory to Culture

Conflict theory originated from the thoughts and writings of Karl Marx. Essentially, conflict theorists postulate that society is comprised of various groups with competing interests. In this theoretical model, groups work to further their own interests while undermining the interests of other groups. A conflict theorist would likely believe that poverty and crime are caused by economic and social factors rather than by innate character flaws such as laziness, deviance or moral problems. In order to apply conflict theory to culture, it is necessary to understand the differing groups that make up society and how conflicting interests can create inequality.

Ideas on Conflict Theory On Poverty

American thought is largely based on liberal enlightenment ideals, which portray society as a group of individuals who work together to promote rational thought and preserve individual liberties. Over time, this leads to a more egalitarian, humane and advanced society. Conversely, conflict theorists view society as an amalgamation of discrete groups who promote certain interests at the expense of other members of society. This leads to inequality that results in poverty, crime and other problems.

Four Responses to Conflict Reaction

Conflict occurs everywhere: in the home, in the office and even on the street. Two or more people disagree about something and each side becomes more frustrated and angry as the seconds pass. A verbal, or even physical, altercation could occur during a situation like this, but there are healthy ways to handle a conflict and ways to react to conflicts that can improve the relationship.

Ways Diversity Leads to Conflict

Human beings are a pretty diverse group. Differences in ethnicity, gender, gender orientation and religious beliefs are all forms of diversity. When diverse groups meet, oftentimes they co-exist and get along. Unfortunately, in the real world diversity sometimes leads to conflict.

Ethnic Conflicts in the 21st Century

There are many ethnic conflicts currently taking place in the 21st century, some of which started recently and others that have been going on for decades. A majority of these conflicts are in the Middle East, but there are many other ethnic conflicts in different parts of the world.

Solutions for Conflict Diamonds

Conflict diamonds are diamonds that originate in warring nations where rebel and terrorist groups commit heinous crimes against citizens to control the local diamond trade and finance their war efforts. By the year 2000, at least 4 million murders had reportedly been fueled by aims to control the $7.5 billion in annual revenue generated from the blood diamond trade, which then accounted for 4 to 15 percent of all diamonds on the market around the world. By 2006, international regulatory efforts had diminished that presence to approximately 0.2 percent.

What Are the Factors That Cause Conflict?

Times of conflict can mean heated emotions and charged words, so it's important to understand the root causes of a problematic situation. Conflict is inevitable and not always curable, especially if the two sides become distracted with irrelevant or inconsequential details. Considering these factors of conflict can help identify the more rectifiable issues present in most conflicts.

Parents of Juveniles in Conflict

There are many reasons why some juveniles end up in conflict with the law. Hanging with the wrong crowd and curiosity are viable considerations, but many experts believe the family structure has more influence over a child's success, or lack thereof, than any other factor. Broken homes are a leading cause for young people breaking the law. Without structure at home, juveniles are more likely to not adhere to the structures of society. While there are some parents of juvenile delinquents who are model citizens and provide the "ideal" household for their children, many parents cannot or do not foster

What Is Meso Conflict?

The term "meso conflict" describes a stage in the development of human power struggles between interpersonal or small group conflicts and full-scale war. Commonly used in academic social science papers, a "meso conflict" refers to the developmental stage in human conflicts that is limited to institutions or communities.

Different Theories on Conflict

Some define conflict as a struggle for social status, or for scarce resources. Conflict even arises in the form of communication. Conflict in communication is functional when norms and values of the culture are stable, and individual opinions and viewpoints are respected; however, conflict is dysfunctional when it becomes emotionally charged. With the scope of violence and technology changing dramatically in the twentieth century, knowledge of conflict different theories has increased considerably.

How to Discuss Functionalist and Conflict Theories

Functionalist and conflict theories are both major social science theories relating to the individual, the collective and society. Functionalism looks at the way that the individual and society interact to create the things necessary for a society to be formed. Conflict theory examines the societal structure with materialism, and work, being the most important contribution an individual can make to the whole. Functionalism is based on the work of French sociologist Emile Durkheim, while much of conflict theory is based upon work done by Karl Marx.

What Are the Types of Social Conflict Theories?

Social conflict is theorized to occur when an imbalance exists regarding money, resources or power. The conflict can happen in any setting -- global, industrial or familial. While research and case studies may report the details of how, when, why and where a social conflict began or continues, the reasons behind the conflict and the actions of the social groups will generally fall into one of the following three categories.

How to Understand Conflict Theory

Conflict theory is based on the argument that every individual in a society, organization in a society or entire societies will strive to maximize their benefits, which ultimately leads to social change. Understanding conflict theory is challenging, since the entirety of human civilization has roots in conflict. To understand conflict theory thoroughly requires an understanding of conflict theory origins, conflict theory models and a variety of theoretical approaches to conflict theory, such as game theory. The best way to familiarize yourself with these elements of conflict theory is to read about them.

The Conflict Approach to Deviance

Sociology is the study of society and human behavior within a society. Conflict theory is one of many approaches which sociologists use to explain deviance within a society.

Theories of Land Conflict

Land conflict theory is a subset of conflict theory, a sociological perspective that focuses on structural antagonisms in society and their resolutions. Conflict theory is generally traced back to Marx, who first posited a sociological account of social conflict in his theses on class and capitalism. Conflict theory was subsequently taken up as an academic challenge to functionalist and positivist perspectives in the social sciences. Land conflict theory applies conflict theory premises to land disputes.

Interpersonal Conflict Theory

Interpersonal conflict theory seeks to explain why conflicts arise between two or more parties and helps people learn ways to resolve them. This theory can relate to romantic partners, friends, colleagues, relatives and others.

Constructivism Conflict
Constructivism is a form of epistemology, which is an approach to knowledge. In this approach, knowledge is not based on the accumulation of what is "out there." When applied to conflict, constructivism normally refers to national or other group actors interpreting their own history and sense of identity as they challenge others.

System Theory of Conflict

System theory is an approach to social life that stresses functional parts working together for a specific end. In general, this approach deals with what holds the organism together, yet when conflict theory is introduced, it explains how things fall apart. A system theory of conflict seeks to show how parts of a system do not always harmoniously work together.

Conflict Theory and Globalization

Conflict, or critical, theory is an approach to analyzing society that stresses the differences in power among social groups. This can be applied to classes within societies, or even to countries within the global economic and trading system. When conflict theory is applied to global politics, this same scheme is followed: the poorer countries of the world are contrasted with the wealthy ones. The wealthy create the rules that are then forced upon the poor.

Conflict Theory & Criminology

Conflict theory is the approach to social life that stresses the existence of unequal groups in society. In its most general form, conflict theory (sometimes called critical theory) holds that laws and moral codes are creations of the wealthy that are inflicted on the poor to control them. For criminologists then, conflict theory holds that the criminal justice system is the most violent form of this control.

Define Conflict Theory

Conflict, or critical theory, is a complex philosophical attack on modern political life. Usually, this body of thought is known as "critical" theory in philosophy, and "conflict" theory in the social sciences. The terms are identical. The chief method of critical writers begins with the idea that social life is based on the imposition of a legal and moral code on the poor by the wealthy. The inequality of social groups is the main starting point for this tradition.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Conflict Theory

Social life is the dominance of one group over another, and politics is the rhetorical justification of that group's control. This is the main claim of conflict/critical theory. Conflict theory has been one of the dominant modes of interpreting social life throughout most of the 20th century. It is vaguely associated with forms of socialism.

Keys of Conflict Theory

Conflict theory is a social theory seeking to explain why certain groups stay in power, and why there is conflict within societies and social groups. Karl Marx introduced the theory and it was later adopted by other theorists who did not accept that everyone within a society has their place or that each is essential to keep the society functioning as a whole.

Conflict Theory & Religion

Conflict theory for religion is a natural outgrowth of the conflicts that naturally exist in cultures. Religious identity acts as an indicator of social status while incorporating the social status of the group into its religious worldview as an extension of its social status.

Conflict Theory
Conflict theory posits that social groups or classes compete with each other in order to obtain resources that the society deems important.

Conflict Theory & Deviance

The conflict perspective on deviance assumes that deviance, that is, behavior that departs from the social norm, is a social creation. It assumes that there is no "human nature" that sets a natural mode of behavior. Instead, conflict theory holds that it is the power structure in any given society that defines what is normal and what is not. Hence, deviance is the creation of the social structure, not something built into our nature.

Symbolic Interaction & Marxism Theory

Societies form bonds around certain symbols, such as flags, although they are not always universally interpreted the same way. In the 1950s and '60s, cultural Marxists began studying noneconomic factors that led to class conflict.

Essay on the Conflict Theory of Functionalism

Functionalism is the oldest of the major sociological theories and is the first to treat it as a pure science. Functionalists believe social structures can be studied rationally through surveys and interviews.

Theories of Deviance in Conflict Theory

The basic theory of deviance in social conflict centers around class warfare, in which the lower classes rebel against the upper classes who set the rules upon which society operates; laws are then generated to settle these conflicts. Any violation of these laws is seen as a deviant act.

Social-Conflict Theory
The seeds for social-conflict theory were planted in the 19th century but did not take root until the 1960s. The underlying tenet of social conflict is that the lower class is competing for resources against an upper class that controls the government, courts and industry.

Bowie Knife History

Colonel James "Jim" Bowie first gained recognition for his skill with a knife following his role in the "Sandbar Duel" in Mississippi in 1827. As the fame of Jim Bowie and his knife spread, demand for the "Bowie knife" grew.

Realism International Relations Theory

Realism is the oldest of the international relations theories. Its main premise is that every nation state's goal is to gain power to protect itself from other nations' attacks. The theory is based on survival of the fittest, a basic biological norm.

Read more: Conflict Theory - How To Information | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/conflicttheory/#ixzz25UkPWieL

Consider This Conflict Theory To Manage Conflict

Conflict is all around us, ranging from simple situations such as who left the dishes in the sink to major international disputes. There is a conflict theory that common stages are passed through as conflict develops. Here is one example:

Stages of Conflict
1. Discomfort
John feels that his manager, Gerard, does not keep him informed of what is happening in the business. John works primarily offsite with customers and can be away for long periods of time.

2. Incident

Gerard promotes Ann, John's colleague, based on her qualifications and experience.

3. Misunderstanding
John feels he missed out on the promotion he was expecting. He believes that this is because he is not based in the home office on a full time basis and he has been treated unfairly. He becomes mistrustful and negative towards his manager.

4. Tension
John's enthusiasm for the job starts to decrease. He does "what is necessary" to get by at work. His commitment to the business is diminished. Gerard becomes increasingly frustrated by John's attitude.

5. Crisis
Gerard challenges John over a customer complaint, words are exchanged and tempers flare. When conflict reaches a crisis stage, a lot of time and effort is needed to get it resolved. Too often we avoid dealing with situations at the discomfort stage. We bury our feelings and don't discuss what is on our mind, hoping that the situation will resolve itself. It is so much easier to communicate before resentment has started to grow. As a manager, be alert to conflict in its early stages and take steps to prevent it from escalating. This means being open to the other person's views, avoiding judgements and discussing until a resolution is reached for both parties.

Complex Conflict
There is a conflict theory that suggests mapping the issue can help in a complex situation, where many parties and interests are involved. This involves four stages: 1. 2. 3. 4. Identify the issue Identify who is involved List the major needs and concerns of each party Categorise the tangible needs (which can be traded) or intangible needs (such as work needed on building relationships)

If you map this as shown in the diagram, then you can look for areas where there is common agreement and areas which need to be given priority. It will help you to build an action plan and move the conflict into a more productive phase. It is important to respect and value differences, keep a broad perspective and recognise that this work may need a long timeframe.

Click on Definition of Conflict to discover how people's perception of conflict differs. It also covers role conflict and team conflict, and how best to manage it. If you are in a crisis or near crisis situation, these Conflict Resolution Tips will give you some pointers to follow.

CONFLICT THEORY
In sociology, conflict theory states that society or an organization functions so that each individual participant and its groups struggle to maximize their benefits, which inevitably contributes to social change such as political changes and revolutions. The theory is mostly applied to explain conflict between social classes, proletariat versus bourgeoisie; and in ideologies, such as capitalism versus socialism. While conflict theory successfully describes instances where conflict occurs between groups of people, for a variety of reasons, it is questionable whether this represents the ideal human society. Although some theorists, such as Karl Marx, have claimed that growth and development occur through the conflict between opposing parties, cooperation is also a source of healthy growth. It needs to be determined under which situations, if any, conflict is necessary to produce change, as compared to those under which cooperation and harmony lead to the greatest advances.
Contents
[hide]

1 Conflict theory 2 Marx and conflict theory

3 Weber and conflict theory 4 Feminist conflict theory 5 Conflict theory applied to society 6 Notes 7 External links 8 Credits

Conflict theory
The history of conflict theory can be traced back to thinkers such as Machiavelli or Thomas Hobbes, both of whom viewed humanity cynically. In its current form, conflict theory attempts to refute the functionalist approach, which considers that societies and organizations function so that each individual and group plays a specific role, like organs in the body. There are radical basic assumptions (society is eternally in conflict, which might explainsocial change), or moderate ones (custom and conflict are always mixed). The moderate version allows for functionalism to operate as an equally acceptable theory since it would accept that even negative social institutions play a part in society's self-perpetuation. The essence of conflict theory is best epitomized by the classic "pyramid structure" in which an elite dictates terms to the larger masses. All major social structures, laws, and traditions in the society are designed to support those who have traditionally been in power, or the groups that are perceived to be superior in the society according to this theory. Conflict theorists would argue that all groups in society are born from conflict. An example might be that of labor unions, which are developed to fight for the interests of workers, whereas trade organizations are made to fight for the interests of the moneyed classes. This theory of groups is opposed to functionalism in which each of these groups would play a specific, set role in society. In functionalism, these groups cooperate to benefit society whereas in conflict theory the groups are in opposition to one another as they seek to better their masters. "It is in the interests of those who have wealth to keep and extend what they own, whereas it is in the [1] interests of those who have little or no wealth to try to improve their lot in life." This can also be expanded to include any society's morality, and by extension their definition of deviance. Anything that challenges the control of the elite will likely be considered "deviant" or "morally reprehensible." The theory can be applied on both the macro level (like the U.S. government or Soviet Russia, historically) or the micro level (a church organization or school club). In summary, conflict theory seeks to catalog the ways in which those in power seek to stay in power. In understanding conflict theory, competition between social classes plays a key part. The following are four primary assumptions of modern conflict theory: 1. Competition: Competition over scarce resources (money, leisure, sexual partners, and so on) is at the heart of all social relationships. Competition rather than consensus is characteristic of human relationships. 2. Structural inequality: Inequalities in power and reward are built into all social structures. Individuals and groups that benefit from any particular structure strive to see it maintained. 3. Revolution: Change occurs as a result of conflict between social class's competing interests rather than through adaptation. It is often abrupt and revolutionary rather than evolutionary.

4. War: Even war is a unifier of the societies involved, as well as war may set an end to whole societies. Conflict theory was elaborated in the United Kingdom by Max Gluckman and John Rex, in the United States by Lewis A. Coser, and Randall Collins, and in Germany by Ralf Dahrendorf, all of them being less or more influenced by Karl Marx, Ludwig Gumplovicz, Vilfredo Pareto, Georg Simmel, and other founding fathers of European sociology.

Marx and conflict theory

Karl Marx argued that property is upheld by the state, making property struggles into political struggles between owners and renters, capitalists and workers, and other groups. Material conditions determine the ability of any of these groups to organize effectively politically. These material conditions are also what enable one group to propagate their views to others in society. Because the owners clearly have an [2] advantage in material wealth, their views are spread more easily. For Marx, the conflict clearly arises because all things of value to man result from human labor. According to Marx, capitalists exploit workers for their labor and do not share the fruits of these labors equally. This exploitation is what allows the owning classes to dominate politically and to impose their ideology on the [3] workers of the world.

Weber and conflict theory

Max Weber refined Marx's conflict theory. Weber stated that more than one conflict over property existed at any given moment in any given society, which is more nuanced than Marx's theory that the only struggle of importance was that between owners and workers. Weber included an emotional aspect of conflict as well: It is these that underlie the power of religion and make it an important ally of the state; that transform classes into status groups, and do the same to territorial communities under particular circumstances (ethnicity); and that make "legitimacy" a crucial focus for efforts at domination. Weber's conclusions on conflict theory are similar to those reached by thinkers such as Emile Durkheim, Sigmund Freud, and Nietzsche, namely that beyond emotionality, some particular forms of social interaction create strongly held beliefs and solidarity among members of groups.

Feminist conflict theory

Conflict theory has been used by feminists to explain the position of women in society. Feminist conflict theorists argue that women have traditionally been oppressed so that men can benefit from positions of power, wealth, and status. These theorists would argue that the conflict over limited natural resources is what led men to relegate women to domesticity. This interpretation of conflict theory also leads to the idea that men cannot be trusted to give power to women because this gift would conflict with their inherent nature.

Conflict theory applied to society

Conflict theory offers a useful lens with which to analyze society. One might use this theory to explain the enmity between rich and poor within any society. This enmity could be expressed emotionally, verbally, or

physically. Applying the theory to notable class conflicts is possible. Events such as the "Battle in Seattle" over global trade or the French Revolution serve as two examples. Conflict theory can also be used to explain non-economic conflicts within a society. One might look at the divide between Protestants and Catholics as a battle over spiritual resources. On a less macro level, the competition between students in a classroom serves as a useful example as well. In such ways, conflict theory is usefully ambiguous in its application to innumerable phenomena.

Notes
1. www.sociology.org, Conflict Theories. Retrieved December 3, 2007. 2. Randall Collins, Conflict Sociology (New York: Academic Press, 1974). 3. Kent McClelland, Conflict Theory. Retrieved December 3, 2007.

External links
Class, State, And Crime: Social Conflict Perspective. Retrieved March 4, 2008. The Basics of Conflict Theory from Collins, Randall. 1974. Conflict Sociology. New York, NY: Academic Press. pp.56-61. Retrieved March 4, 2008. UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT AND WAR: VOL. 2: THE CONFLICT HELIX By R.J. Rummel. Retrieved March 4, 2008.

Conflict management
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This article is written like a personal reflection or essay rather than an encyclopedic description of the subject. (April 2012) This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (April 2012) This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (April 2012)
Conflict management involves implementing strategies to limit the negative aspects of conflict and to increase the positive aspects of conflict at a level equal to or higher than where the conflict is taking place. Furthermore, the aim of conflict management is to enhance learning and group outcomes (effectiveness or performance in organizational setting) (Rahim, 2002, p. 208). It is not concerned with eliminating all conflict or avoiding conflict. Conflict can be valuable to groups and organizations. It has been shown to increase group outcomes when managed properly (e.g. Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000; Bodtker & Jameson, 2001; Rahim & Bonoma, 1979; Khun & Poole, 2000; DeChurch & Marks, 2001).
Contents
[hide]

1 Background 2 Definitions

o o o

2.1 Conflict 2.2 Substantive Vs. Affective 2.3 Organizational and Interpersonal Conflict

3 Conflict Resolution Vs. Conflict Management 4 Models of Conflict Management

o o o o

4.1 Early Conflict Management Models 4.2 Khun and Pooles Model 4.3 DeChurch and Markss Meta-Taxonomy 4.4 Rahim's meta model

5 How to manage conflict

5.1 Steps to Manage

6 International Conflict Management 7 Application

o o

7.1 Higher education 7.2 Counselling

8 See also 9 References 10 External links

[edit]Background
Supervisors spend more than 25% of their time on conflict management, and managers spend more than 18% of their time on relational employee conflicts. These figures have doubled since the mid 1980s. Companies have distinguished some key factors as the growing complexity of organizations, use of teams and group decision making, and globalization. (Lang, 2009, p. 240) The United Kingdoms Defense Department realized that the new concepts of threats are not the concern any more. It is the capability to deal with them that matters. (Fisher, 2010, p.429) It is now becoming more evident that this is something that companies and managers need to recognize, and deal with. Conflict significantly affects employee morale, turnover, and litigation, which affects the prosperity of a company, either constructively or destructively. (Lang, 2009, p. 240) Turnover can cost a company 200% of the employees annual salary. (Maccoby & Scudder, p.48)

[edit]Definitions [edit]Conflict
While no single definition of conflict exists, most definitions seem to involve the following factors: that there are at least two independent groups, the groups perceive some incompatibility between themselves, and the groups interact with each other in some way (Putnam and Poole, 1987). Two example definitions are, process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party" (Wall & Callister, 1995, p. 517), and the interactive process manifested in incompatibility, disagreement, or dissonance within or between social entities (Rahim, 1992, p. 16). There are several causes of conflict. Conflict may occur when:

A party is required to engage in an activity that is incongruent with his or her needs or interests. A party holds behavioral preferences, the satisfaction of which is incompatible with another person's implementation of his or her preferences.

A party wants some mutually desirable resource that is in short supply, such that the wants of all parties involved may not be satisfied fully.

A party possesses attitudes, values, skills, and goals that are salient in directing his or her behavior but are perceived to be exclusive of the attitudes, values, skills, and goals held by the other(s).

Two parties have partially exclusive behavioral preferences regarding their joint actions. Two parties are interdependent in the performance of functions or activities.

(Rahim, 2002, p. 207)

[edit]Substantive

Vs. Affective

The overarching hierarchy of conflict starts with a distinction between substantive (also called performance, task, issue, or active) conflict and affective (also called relationship or [the opposite of] agreeable) conflict. If one could make a distinction between good and bad conflict, substantive would be good and affective conflict would be bad. However, in a meta-analysis of the current research, De Drue and Weingart (2003) showed that these two concepts are related to each other (corrected correlation, = .54). Substantive conflict deals with disagreements among group members about the content of the tasks being performed or the performance itself (DeChurch & Marks, 2001; Jehn, 1995). This type of conflict occurs when two or more social entities disagree on the recognition and solution to a task problem, including differences in viewpoints, ideas, and opinions (Jehn, 1995; Rahim, 2002). Affective conflict deals with interpersonal relationships or incompatibilities (Behfar, Peterson, Mannix, & Trochim, 2008). It is generated from emotions and frustration (Bodtker & Jameson, 2001), and has a detrimental impact on group or organizational outcomes (i.e. information processing ability, cognitive

functioning of group members, attributions of group members' behavior, group loyalty, work group commitment, intent to stay in the present organization, and job satisfaction) (Amason, 1996; Baron, 1997; Jehn, 1995; Jehn et al., 1999; Wall & Nolan, 1986). Summarily stated, "relationship conflict interferes with task-related effort because members focus on reducing threats, increasing power, and attempting to build cohesion rather than working on tasks...The conflict causes members to be negative, irritable, suspicious, and resentful" (Jehn, 1997, pp. 531-532; c.f. Rahim, 2002, p. 210). Thus, [substantive] conflicts occur when group members argue over alternatives related to the group's task, whereas [affective] conflicts result over interpersonal clashes not directly related to achieving the group's function (Amason, 1996; Guetzhow & Gyr, 1954; Jehn, 1992; Pinkley, 1990; Priem & Price, 1991) (c.f. DeChurch & Marks, 2001, p. 5). In De Dreu and Weingart's 2003 meta-analysis, both substantive and affective conflict are negatively related to team member satisfaction ( = -.32; -.56, respectively). Additionally, substantive and affective conflict are negatively related to team performance ( = -.20; -.25, respectively). It is important to note that 20% (5 of 25) of the studies used showed a positive correlation between substantive conflict and task performance. These relationships show the severe negative impact that conflict can have on groups, and illustrate the importance of conflict management.

[edit]Organizational

and Interpersonal Conflict

Organizational conflict, whether it be substantive or affective, can be divided into intraorganizational and interorganizational. Interorganizational conflict occurs between two or more organizations (Rahim, 2002). When different businesses are competing against one another, this is an example of interorganizational conflict Intraorganizational conflict is conflict within an organization, and can be examined based upon level (e.g. department, work team, individual), and can be classified as interpersonal, intragroup and intergroup. Interpersonal conflict--once again--whether it is substantive or affective, refers to conflict between two or more individuals (not representing the group they are a part of) of the same or different group at the same or different level, if in an organization. Interpersonal conflict can be divided into intragroup and intergroup conflict. While the former--intragroup--occurs between members of a group (or between subgroups within a group), the latter-intergroup--occurs between groups or units in an organization (Rahim, 2002).

[edit]Conflict

Resolution Vs. Conflict Management

As the name would suggest, conflict resolution involves the reduction, elimination, or termination of all forms and types of conflict. In practice, when people talk about conflict resolution they tend to use terms like negotiation, bargaining, mediation, or arbitration. In line with the recommendations in the "how to" section, businesses can benefit from appropriate types and levels of conflict. That is the aim of conflict management, and not the aim of conflict resolution. Conflict

management does not necessarily imply conflict resolution. Conflict management involves designing effective macro-level strategies to minimize the dysfunctions of conflict and enhancing the constructive functions of conflict in order to enhance learning and effectiveness in an organization(Rahim, 2002, p. 208). Learning is essential for the longevity of any group. This is especially true for organizations; Organizational learning is essential for any company to remain in the market. Properly managed conflict increases learning through increasing the degree to which groups ask questions and challenge the status quo (Luthans, Rubach, & Marsnik, 1995).

[edit]Models

of Conflict Management

There have been many styles of conflict management behavior that have been researched in the past century. One of the earliest, Mary Parker Follett (1926/1940) found that conflict was managed by individuals in three main ways: domination, compromise, and integration. She also found other ways of handling conflict that were employed by organizations, such as avoidance and suppression.

[edit]Early

Conflict Management Models

Blake and Mouton (1964) were among the first to present a conceptual scheme for classifying the modes (styles) for handling interpersonal conflicts into five types: forcing, withdrawing, smoothing, compromising, and problem solving. In the 1970s and 1980s, researchers began using the intentions of the parties involved to classify the styles of conflict management that they would include in their models. Both Thomas (1976) and Pruitt (1983) put forth a model based on the concerns of the parties involved in the conflict. The combination of the parties concern for their own interests (i.e. assertiveness) and their concern for the interests of those across the table (i.e. cooperativeness) would yield a particular conflict management style. Pruitt called these styles yielding (low assertiveness/high cooperativeness), problem solving (high assertiveness/high cooperativeness), inaction (low assertiveness/low cooperativeness), and contending (high assertiveness/low cooperativeness). Pruitt argues that problem-solving is the preferred method when seeking mutually beneficial options.

[edit]Khun

and Pooles Model

Khun and Poole (2000) established a similar system of group conflict management. In their system, they split Kozans confrontational model into two sub models: distributive and integrative.

Distributive - Here conflict is approached as a distribution of a fixed amount of positive outcomes or resources, where one side will end up winning and the other losing, even if they do win some concessions.

Integrative - Groups utilizing the integrative model see conflict as a chance to integrate the needs and concerns of both groups and make the best outcome possible. This model has a heavier emphasis on

compromise than the distributive model. Khun and Poole found that the integrative model resulted in consistently better task related outcomes than those using the distributive model.

[edit]DeChurch

and Markss Meta-Taxonomy

DeChurch and Marks (2001) examined the literature available on conflict management at the time and established what they claimed was a "meta-taxonomy" that encompasses all other models. They argued that all other styles have inherent in them into two dimensions - activeness ("the extent to which conflict behaviors make a responsive and direct rather than inert and indirect impression") and agreeableness ("the extent to which conflict behaviors make a pleasant and relaxed rather than unpleasant and strainful impression"). High activeness is characterized by openly discussing differences of opinion while fully going after their own interest. High agreeableness is characterized by attempting to satisfy all parties involved In the study they conducted to validate this division, activeness did not have a significant effect on the effectiveness of conflict resolution, but the agreeableness of the conflict management style, whatever it was, did in fact have a positive impact on how groups felt about the way the conflict was managed, regardless of the outcome.

[edit]Rahim's

meta model

Rahim (2002) noted that there is agreement among management scholars that there is no one best approach to how to make decisions, lead or manage conflict. In a similar vein, rather than creating a very specific model of conflict management, Rahim created a meta-model (in much the same way that DeChurch and Marks, 2001, created a meta-taxonomy) for conflict styles based on two dimensions, concern for self and concern for others (as shown in Figure 2). Within this framework are five management approaches: integrating, obliging, dominating, avoiding, and compromising. Integration involves openness, exchanging information, looking for alternatives, and examining differences so solve the problem in a manner that is acceptable to both parties. Obliging is associated with attempting to minimize the differences and highlight the commonalities to satisfy the concern of the other party. When using the dominating style one party goes all out to win his or her objective and, as a result, often ignores the needs and expectations of the other party. When avoiding a party fails to satisfy his or her own concern as well as the concern of the other party. Lastly, compromising involves give-and-take whereby both parties give up something to make a mutually acceptable decision. (Rahim, 2002).

[edit]How

to manage conflict
This article contains instructions, advice, or how-to content. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to train. Please helpimprove this article either by rewriting the how-to content or by moving it to Wikiversity or Wikibooks. (April 2012)

Overall conflict management should aim to minimize affective conflicts at all levels, attain and maintain a moderate amount of substantive conflict, and use the appropriate conflict management strategy--to effectively bring about the first two goals, and also to match the status and concerns of the two parties in conflict (Rahim, 2002). In order for conflict management strategies to be effective, they should satisfy certain criteria. The below criteria are particularly useful for not only conflict management, but also decision makingin management.

Organization Learning and Effectiveness- In order to attain this objective, conflict management strategies should be designed to enhance critical and innovative thinking to learn the process of diagnosis and intervention in the right problems.

Needs of Stakeholders- Sometimes multiple parties are involved in a conflict in an organization and the challenge of conflict management would be to involve these parties in a problem solving process that will lead to collective learning and organizational effectiveness. organizations should institutionalize the positions of employee advocate, customer and supplier advocate, as well as environmental and stockholder advocates.

Ethics - A wise leader must behave ethically, and to do so the leader should be open to new information and be willing to change his or her mind. By the same token subordinates and other stakeholders have an ethical duty to speak out against the decisions of supervisors when consequences of these decisions are likely to be serious. Without an understanding of ethics, conflict cannot be handled (Batcheldor, 2000).

[edit]Steps

to Manage

The first step is reactionary by assessing and reacting to the conflict. The second step is proactive by determining how the employee reacted to the decision. The manager tries to take (create) a new approach, and once again tries to discern how the employee reacts. Once the manager feels that the best decision for the organization has been chosen, and the employee feels justified, then the manager decides if this is a single case conflict, or one that should be written as policy. The entire process starts as a reactive situation but then moves towards a proactive decision. It is based on obtaining an outcome that best fits the organization, but emphasizes the perception of justice for the employee. The chart below shows the interaction of the procedures. Maccoby and Studder identify five steps to managing conflict. 1. Anticipate Take time to obtain information that can lead to conflict. 2. Prevent Develop strategies before the conflict occurs. 3. Identify If it is interpersonal or procedural, move to quickly manage it. 4. Manage Remember that conflict is emotional 5. Resolve React, without blame, and you will learn through dialogue.

(Maccoby & Studder, p.50) Melissa Taylors research on Locus of Control is directly related to individual abilities of communication, especially as it pertains to interpersonal conflict. She also states that conflicts should be solution driven which are creative and integrative. They should be non-confrontational, and they should still maintain control, utilizing non-verbal messages to achieve the outcome.(Taylor, p. 449) Rahim, Antonioni, and Psenickas 2001 article deals with two types of leaders. Those that have concern for themselves, and those that have concern for others. (Rahim, Antonioni & Psenicka, 2001, p.195) They also have degrees of conflict management style. 1. Integrating involves opening up, creating dialogue, and exploring differences to choose an effective solution for both groups. This style is positively associated with individual and organizational outcomes. (Rahim et al., p. 197) 2. Obliging tries to find the same interests of the parties, while trying to minimize the true feeling of the conflict, to satisfy the other party. 3. Dominating is a coercive manager who forces their own way. 4. Avoiding is ignoring the problem in hopes that it will go away. 5. Compromising is a manger that is willing to make concessions and the employee makes concessions for a mutual agreement. (Rahim et al., p.196) The avoiding and dominating styles are considered ineffective in management. The following chart shows the interaction between the styles. (Rahim et al., p. 196)

[edit]International

Conflict Management

Special consideration should be paid to conflict management between two parties from distinct cultures. In addition to the everyday sources of conflict, "misunderstandings, and from this counterproductive, pseudo conflicts, arise when members of one culture are unable to understand culturally determined differences in communication practices, traditions, and thought processing" (Borisoff & Victor, 1989). Indeed, this has already been observed in the business research literature. Renner (2007) recounted several episodes where managers from developed countries moved to less developed countries to resolve conflicts within the company and met with little success due to their failure to adapt to the conflict management styles of the local culture. As an example, in Kozans study noted above, he noted that Asian cultures are far more likely to use a harmony model of conflict management. If a party operating from a harmony model comes in conflict with a party using a more confrontational model, misunderstandings above and beyond those generated by the conflict itself will arise.

International conflict management, and the cultural issues associated with it, is one of the primary areas of research in the field at the time, as existing research is insufficient to deal with the ever increasing contact occurring between international entities.

[edit]Application [edit]Higher

education

With only 14% of researched universities reporting mandatory courses in this subject, and with the up to 25% of the manager day being spent on dealing with conflict, education needs to reconsider the importance of this subject. The subject warrants emphasis on enabling students to deal with conflict management. (Lang, p. 240) Providing more conflict management training in undergraduate business programs could help raise the emotional intelligence of future managers. The improvement of emotional intelligence found that employees were more likely to use problem-solving skills, instead of trying to bargain. (Lang, p. 241) Students need to have a good set of social skills. Good communication skills allow the manager to accomplish interpersonal situations and conflict. Instead of focusing on conflict as a behavior issue, focus on the communication of it. (Myers & Larson, 2005, p.307) With an understanding of the communications required, the student will gain the aptitude needed to differentiate between the nature and types of conflicts. These skills also teach that relational and procedural conflict needs a high degree of immediacy to resolution. If these two conflicts are not dealt with quickly, an employee will become dissatisfied or perform poorly. (Myers & Larson, p.313) It is also the responsibility of companies to react. One option is to identify the skills needed in house, but if the skills for creating workplace fairness are already lacking, it may be best to have an outside organization assist. These are called Developmental Assessment Centers. According to Rupp, Baldwin, and Bashur, these organizations have become a popular means for providing coaching, feedback, and experiential learning opportunities. (Rupp, Baldwin & Bashshur, 2006, p. 145) Their main focus is fairness and how it impacts employees attitudes and performance. These organizations teach competencies and what they mean. (Rupp et al., p. 146) The students then participate in simulations. Multiple observers assess and record what skills are being used and then return this feedback to the participant. After this assessment, participants are then given another set of simulations to utilize the skills learned. Once again they receive additional feedback from observers, in hopes that the learning can be used in their workplace. The feedback the participant receives is detailed, behaviorally specific, and high quality. This is needed for the participant to learn how to change their behavior. (Rupp et al., p. 146) In this regard, it is also important that the participant take time to self-reflect so that learning may occur.

Once an assessment program is utilized, action plans may be developed based on quantitative and qualitative data. (Rupp et al., p. 159)

[edit]Counselling
When personal conflict leads to frustration and loss of efficiency, counseling may prove to be a helpful antidote. Although few organizations can afford the luxury of having professional counselors on the staff, given some training, managers may be able to perform this function. Nondirective counseling, or "listening with understanding," is little more than being a good listenersomething every manager should be.[1] Sometimes the simple process of being able to vent one's feelingsthat is, to express them to a concerned and understanding listener, is enough to relieve frustration and make it possible for the frustrated individual to advance to a problem-solving frame of mind, better able to cope with a personal difficulty that is affecting his work adversely. The nondirective approach is one effective way for managers to deal with frustrated subordinates and co-workers.[2] There are other more direct and more diagnostic ways that might be used in appropriate circumstances. The great strength of the nondirective approach (nondirective counseling is based on the client-centered therapy of Carl Rogers), however, lies in its simplicity, its effectiveness, and the fact that it deliberately avoids the manager-counselor's diagnosing and interpreting emotional problems, which would call for special psychological training. No one has ever been harmed by being listened to sympathetically and understandingly. On the contrary, this approach has helped many people to cope with problems that were interfering with their effectiveness on the job.[2]

[edit]See

also

Conflict resolution Conflict atlas Conflict style inventory

[edit]References
Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (2000) Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53, 625-642. Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 123-1 Baron, R. A. (1997). Positive effects of conflict: Insights from social cognition. In C. K. W. DeDreu & E. Van de Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (pp. 177-191). London: Sage.

Batcheldor, M. (2000) The Elusive Intangible Intelligence: Conflict Management and Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace. The Western Scholar, Fall, 7-9 Behfar, K. J., Peterson, R. S., Mannis, E. A., & Trochim, W. M. K. (2008). The critical role of conflict resolution in teams: A close look at the links between conflict type, conflict management strategies, and team outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 170-188. Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf. Bodtker, A. M., & Jameson, J. K. (2001) Emotion in conflict formation and its transformation: Application to organizational conflict management. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 3, 259-275. Borisoff, D., & Victor, D. A. (1989). Conflict management: A communication skills approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. De Dreu, C. K. W. & Weingart, L. R. (2003) Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 741-749. DeChurch, L. A, & Marks, M. A. (2001) Maximizing the benefits of task conflict: The role of conflict management. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 4-22. Follett, M. P. (1940). Constructive conflict. In H. C. Metcalf & L. Urwick (Eds.), Dynamic administration: The collected papers of Mary Parker Follett (pp. 30-49). New York: Harper & Row. (originally published 1926). Guetzkow, H., & Gyr, J. (1954). An analysis of conflict in decision-making groups. Hitman Relations, 7, 367381. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and determinants of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282. Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions of organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530-557. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741-763. Kozan, M. K. (1997) Culture and conflict management: A theoretical framework. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, 338-360. Kuhn, T., & Poole, M. S. (2000). Do conflict management styles affect group decision making? Human Communication Research, 26, 558-590. Luthans, F., Rubach, M. J., & Marsnik, P. (1995). Going beyond total quality: The characteristics, techniques, and measures of learning organizations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3, 24-44.

Pinkley, R. L. (1990). Dimensions of conflict frame: Disputant interpretations of conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 117-126. Pruitt, D. G. (1983). Strategic choice in negotiation. American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 167-194. Rahim, M. A. (1992). Managing conflict in organizations (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Praeger. Rahim, M. A. (2002) Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 13, 206-235. Rahim, M. A., & Bonoma, T. V. (1979). Managing organizational conflict: A model for diagnosis and intervention. Psychological Reports, 44, 1323-1344. Renner, J. (2007). Coaching abroad: Insights about assets. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59, 271285. Ruble, T. L., & Thomas, K. W. (1976). Support for a two-dimensional model for conflict behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 143-155. Thomas, K. W. (1976). Conflict and conflict management. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 889-935). Chicago: Rand McNally. Van de Vliert, E., & Kabanoff, B. (1990). Toward theory-based measures of conflict management. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 199-209. Wall, J. A., Jr., & Callister, R. R. (1995). Conflict and its management. Journal of Management, 21, 515-558. Wall, V. D., Jr., & Nolan, L. L. (1986). Perceptions of inequity, satisfaction, and conflict in task in task-oriented groups. Human Relations, 39, 1033-1052. Fisher, N. (2010). A better way to manage conflict. Political Quarterly, 81(3), 428-430. doi:10.1111/j.1467923X.2010.02103.x Huo, Y. J., Molina, L. E., Sawahata, R., & Deang, J. M. (2005). Leadership and the management of conflicts in diverse groups: Why acknowledging versus neglecting subgroup identity matters. European Journal Of Social Psychology, 35(2), 237-254. doi:10.100 Ishak, A. W., & Ballard, D. I. (2012). Time to re-group: A typology and nested phase model for action teams. Small Group Research, 43(1), 3-29. oi:10.1177/1046496411425250 Lang, M. (2009). Conflict management: A gap in business education curricula. Journal Of Education For Business, 84(4), 240-245. Maccoby, M., & Scudder, T. (2011). Leading in the heat of conflict. T+D, 65(12), 46-51.

Myers, L. L., & Larson, R. (2005). Preparing students for early work conflicts. Business Communication Quarterly, 68(3), 306-317. doi:10.1177/1080569905278967 Rahim, M., Antonioni, D., & Psenicka, C. (2001). A structureal equations model of leader power, subordinates' styles of handling conflict, and job performance. International Journal Of Conflict Management, 12(3), 191. Rupp, D. E., Baldwin, A., & Bashshur, M. (2006). Using developmental assessment centers to foster workplace fairness. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 9(2), 145-170. doi:10.1207/s15503461tpmj0902_6 Schaller-Demers, D. (2008). Conflict: A Catalyst for Institutional Change. Journal Of Research Administration, 39(2), 81-90. Taylor, M. (2010). Does locus of control predict young adult conflict strategies with superiors? An examination of control orientation and the organizational communication conflict instrument. North American Journal Of Psychology, 12(3), 445-458. Wilson, J. (2004). Make conflict management successful -- if not cheerful!. Accounting Today, 18(19), 22-27. Zemke, R. (1985). The honeywell studies: How managers learn to manage. Training, 22(8), 46-51.
1. ^ Henry P Knowles; Brje O Saxberg (1971). Personality and leadership behavior. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.. Chapter 8. OCLC 118832. 2. ^
a b

Richard Arvid Johnson (1976). Management, systems, and society : an introduction. Pacific Palisades,

Calif.: Goodyear Pub. Co.. pp. 148142. ISBN 0-87620-540-6 9780876205402.OCLC 2299496.

[edit]External

links

Conflict Management Articles - A collection of Conflict Management Articles Search For Common Ground - One of the world's largest non-government organisations dedicated to conflict resolution

CUNY Dispute Resolution Consortium- The Dispute Resolution Headquarters in New York City. The Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) Conflict Management Toolkit

Clarifying Confusion About Conflict

Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD Conflict occurs with two or more people who, despite their first attempts at agreement, do not yet have agreement on a course of action, usually because their values, perspectives and opinions are contradictory in nature. Conflict can occur:

1. Within yourself when you are not living according to your values. 2. When your values and perspectives are threatened. 3. When there is discomfort from fear of the unknown or from lack of fulfillment. Conflict is inevitable and often necessary when forming high-performing teams because they evolve through form, storm, norm and perform periods. Getting the most out of diversity often means addressing contradictory values, perspectives and opinions. Conflict is often needed. It: Helps to raise and address problems. Energizes work to be focused on the most important priorities. Helps people be real and motivates them to fully participate. Helps people learn how to recognize and benefit from their differences.

Conflict is not the same as discomfort. The conflict is not the problem poor management of the conflict is the problem. Conflict is a problem when it: Hampers productivity. Lowers morale. Causes more and continued conflicts. Causes inappropriate behaviors.

Types of Managerial Actions That Cause Workplace Conflicts

Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD

1. Poor communications
Employees experience continual surprises, for example, they are not informed of major decisions that affect their workplaces and lives. Employees do not understand the reasons for the decisions they are not involved in the decision-making. As a result, they trust the rumor mill more than their management.

2. The alignment or the amount of resources is insufficient. There is:

Disagreement about who does what. Stress from working with inadequate resources.

3.Personal chemistry, including conflicting values or actions, for example:

Strong interpersonal natures among workers do not seem to match. We do not like others because they seem too much like ourselves (we often do not like in others what we do not like in ourselves).

4. Leadership problems
For example, inconsistent, missing, too-strong or uninformed leadership (at any level in the organization), evidenced by: Avoiding conflict, passing the buck with little follow-through on decisions. Employees see the same continued issues in the workplace. Supervisors do not understand the jobs of their subordinates.

Key Managerial Actions / Structures to Minimize Conflicts

Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD

1. Regularly review job descriptions. Get your employees input to them. Ensure:
Job roles do not conflict. No tasks fall in a crack.

2. Intentionally build relationships with all subordinates.

Meet at least once a month alone with them in office. Ask about accomplishments, challenges and issues.

3. Get regular, written status reports that describe:

Accomplishments. Currents issues and needs from management. Plans for the upcoming period.

4. Conduct basic training about:

Interpersonal communications. Conflict management. Delegation.

5. Develop procedures for routine tasks and include the employees input.
Have employees write procedures when possible and appropriate. Get employees review of the procedures. Distribute the procedures. Train employees about the procedures.

6. Regularly hold management meetings with all employees.

For example, every month, communicate new initiatives and status of current products or services.

7. Consider an anonymous suggestion box in which employees can provide suggestions.

This can be powerful means to collect honest feedback, especially in very conflicted workplaces.

Ways People Deal With Conflict

Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD There is no one best way to deal with conflict. It depends on the current situation. Here are the major ways that people use to deal with conflict:

1. You can avoid it.

Pretend it is not there or ignore it. Use this approach only when it simply is not worth the effort to argue. Be aware that this approach tends to worsen the conflict over time.

2. You can accommodate it.

You can give in to others, sometimes to the extent that you compromise yourself. Use this approach very sparingly and infrequently, for example, in situations when you know that you will have another more useful approach in the very near future. Usually this approach tends to worsen the conflict over time, and causes conflicts within yourself.

3. You can compete with the others.

You can work to get your way, rather than clarifying and addressing the issue. Competitors love accommodators. Use this approach when you have a very strong conviction about your position.

4. Compromising.
You can engage in mutual give-and-take. This approach is used when the goal is to get past the issue and move on together.

5. Collaborating.
You can focus on working together. Use this approach when the goal is to meet as many current needs as possible by using mutual resources. This approach sometimes raises new mutual needs. Collaboration can also be used when the goal is to cultivate ownership and commitment.

To Manage a Conflict with Another Person

Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD

1. Know what you do not like about yourself, early on in your career.
We often do not like in others what we do not want to see in ourselves. Write down 5 traits that really bug you when see them in others. Be aware that these traits are your hot buttons.

2. Manage yourself. If you and/or another person are getting upset, then manage yourself to stay calm:
Speak to the person as if the other person is not upset this can be very effective! Avoid use of the word you this avoids your appearing to be blaming the person. Nod your head to assure the person that you heard him/her. Maintain eye contact with the person.

3. Move the discussion to a private area, if possible.

Many times, moving to a new environment invites both of you to see or feel differently.

4. Give the other person time to vent.

Do not interrupt the person or judge what he/she is saying.

5. Verify that you are accurately hearing each other. When the other person is done speaking:
Ask the person to let you rephrase (uninterrupted) what you are hearing to ensure you are hearing it correctly. To understand the person more, ask open-ended questions (avoid why questions those questions often make people feel defensive).

6. Repeat the above step, for the other to verify that he/she is hearing you. Describe your perspective:
Use I, not you. Talk in terms of the present as much as possible. Quickly mention your feelings.

7. Acknowledge where you disagree and where you agree.

One of the most powerful means to resolve conflict is to mention where you both agree.

8. Discuss the matter on which you disagree, not the nature of the other person.
Ask What can we do fix the problem? The person might begin to complain again. Then ask the same question. Focus on actions you both can do. Ask the other person if they will support the action(s). If the person will not, then ask for a cooling off period.

9. Thank the person for working with you.

It takes patience for a person to engage in meaningful conversation during conflict. Acknowledge and thank the other person for his/her effort.

10. If the situation remains a conflict, then:

Conclude if the other persons behavior violates one of the personnel policies and procedures in the workplace and if it does, then follow the policys terms for addressing that violation. Otherwise, consider whether to agree to disagree. Consider seeking a third party to mediate.

Additional Perspectives on Conflict Management

Basic Advice (Suggestions, Steps and Tips)
Basics of Conflict Management (conflict within yourself or with others) Conflict - An Essential Ingredient For Growth (basic styles to deal with conflict) Kare Anderson: Six Off-Beat Ways to Get Along Better Kare Anderson: Keeping Cool While Under Fire How to Resolve Conflicts (basics in one-on-one relationship, meetings and in negotiations) The Right Way to Fight The Good Fight: How Conflict Can Help Your Idea Conflict to Collaboration How to Agreeably Disagree in 4 Steps How to Confront Without Conflict 5 Ways to Foster Healthy Communication in Conflict Situations Mediating a Workplace Conflict 7 Tips to Prepare for a Challenging Discussion Career Misfire: You've Said Things You Now Regret How Project Managers Can Manage Conflict Is Conflict at Work Good or Bad? Also see Building Trust Communications (Interpersonal) Communications (Organizational) Communications (Writing)

Conflict (Interpersonal) Etiquette (Manners) Handling Difficult People Valuing Diversity Negotiating Office Politics Related Library Topics

Towards Broader Views on Conflict in Organizations

13 Conflict Management Skills Dealing With Conflict The Good Fight: How Conflict Can Help Your Idea When You Don't Want Employees to Agree How to Fix Misunderstandings at Work and in Life Create a Conflict Resolution Culture Conflict to Collaboration

Assessments
Free instrument for measuring the cost of organizational conflict Conflict Assessment

Free, Online Book

Helping Others Resolve Differences: Empowering Stakeholders Guide to Advertising and Marketing Regulations

Miscellaneous Topics
Can Conflict in Nonprofits Be Managed Successfully? Addressing Interpersonal Conflicts Akaido and Conflict Resolution

General Resources About Conflict Management

Bully Online Mediation Information and Resource Center Articles, Instruments, Resources Conflict Research Consortium Transformative Approaches to Conflict Resolution A Comparison of Conflict Style Inventories

For the Category of Interpersonal Skills:

To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources. Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.

Conflict Management Skills

Gregorio Billikopf DOW NLOAD FREE MEDI AT I ON AN D CONFLI CT M AN AG EMENT BOOK IN PDF FORMAT, OVER 300 PAGES, by Gregorio Billikopf, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (Party-Directed Mediation, 2nd Edition, 2009). Covers deep-seated conflicts between peers, as well as a separate model for supervisor -subordinate conflict management and mediation.

Beth just got turned down by Carlos, the mechanic. She had asked Carlos to plan on working a couple of overtime hours this coming Thursday and Friday evenings. Beth's nose was a bit bent out of joint. She wondered if Carlos did not yield to her because she was too kind when she asked. Or, because she was a woman. Or, because Carlos was envious that she got the supervisory position for which both had competed. Carlos was uncomfortable with the interaction, too.

If Carlos had no clue that Beth was upset, would this scene still constitute interpersonal conflict? Perhaps. The seeds of conflict are planted when disharmony is felt within any one of the participants. Next time Beth approaches Carlos she may change her approach. She may be more abrupt, leading Carlos to wonder if Beth got up on the wrong side of the bed. Carlos may then, in turn, react negatively to Beth, thus escalating the conflict. Individuals sometimes encounter stress and negative emotion out

of an interactionwhether or not they ever confront each other about their feelings.

W herever choices exist there is potential for disagreement. Such differences, when handled properly, can result in richer, more effective, creative solutions and interaction. But alas, it is difficult to consistently turn differences into opportunities. W hen disagreement is poorly dealt with, the outcome can be contention. Contention creates a sense of psychological distance between people, such as feelings of dislike, bitter antagonism, competition, alienation, and disregard.

W hether dealing with family members or hired personnel, sooner or later challenges will arise. It is unlikely that we find ourselves at a loss of words when dealing with family members. Communication patterns with those closest to us are not always positive, however, often falling into a predictable and ineffective exchange.

W ith hired personnel and strangers, we may often try and put forth our best behavior. Out of concern for how we are perceived, we may err in saying too little when things go wrong. W e may suffer for a long time before bringing issues up. This is especially so during what could be called a "courting period." Instead of saying things directly, we often try to hint.

But the honeymoon is likely to end sooner or later. At some point this "courting behavior" often gets pushed aside out of necessity. We may find it easier to sweep problems under the psychological rug until the mound of dirt is so large we cannot help but trip over it. Sometime after that transition is made, it may become all too easy to start telling the employee or co -worker exactly what has to be done differently. An isolated episode such as the one between Beth and Carlos may or may not affect their future working relationship.

Persons differ in their sensitivity to comments or actions of others, as well as their ability to deal with the stress created by a conflict situation. W hile it is important that we are sensi tive to how we affect others, there is much virtue in not taking offense

easily ourselves. Or by finding constructive outlets to dissipate stressful feelings (e.g., exercise, music, reading, an act of service to another, or even a good night's sleep). It d oes little good, however, to appear unaffected while steam builds up within and eventually explodes.

W hen disagreements emerge it is easy to hear without listening. People involved in conflict often enlist others to support their perspective and thus avoid trying to work matters out directly with the affected person.

Our self-esteem is more fragile than most of us would like to admit (see Chapter 6, Sidebar 3). Unresolved conflict often threaten whatever self-esteem we may possess. By finding someone who agrees with us, we falsely elevate that self -esteem. But we only build on sand. Our self -esteem will be constructed over a firmer foundation when we learn to deal effectively with the conflict. In Spanish there are two related words, self-esteem is c al l ed aut oes t i ma, whi l e f al s e s el f - es t eem is c al led a mor propio(literally, "self-love").

It takes more skill, effort and commit ment --and, at least in the short run,more stress--to face the challenge together with the other person involved in the dispute. Certainly it seems as if it would be easier to fight, withdraw, or give in. Yet in the long run, working through difficulties together will help us live a less stressful and more fulfilling life.

Fighting it out. A man sat in his train compartment looking out into the serene Russian countryside. Two women entered to join him. One held a lap dog. The women looked at this man with contempt, for he was smoking. In desperation, one of the women got up, lifted up the window, took the cigar off the mans lips, and threw i t out. The man sat there for a while, and then proceeded to re -open the window, grab the womans dog from off her lap, and throw it out the window. No, this is not a story from todays Russian newspaper, instead it is from Fyodor Dostoevskys 19th century novel, The Idiot. The number and seriousness of workplace violence cases in agriculture seems to be on the rise, and farm

employers can respond with effective policies and increased education.

Yielding. W hile most can readily see the negative consequences and ugliness of escalating contention, we often do not consider how unproductive and harmful withdrawing or giving in can be. Naturally, there are occasions when doing so is not only wise, but honorable (as there are times to stand firm). If a person feels obligated to continually give in and let another have his way, such yielding individual may stop caring and withdraw psychologically from the situation.

Avoidance. When we engage in avoidance, it only weakens already fragile relationships. These "others" (e.g., sympathetic coworkers) usually tend to agree with us. They do so not just because they are our friends, but mostly because they see the conflict and possible solutions from our perspective. After all, they heard the story from us. Once a person has the support of a friend, she may feel justified in her behavior and not try to put as much energy into solving the conflict.

One particularly damaging form of conflict avoidance is to send someone else to deliver a message or confront another on our behalf. At best, the individual not spoken to directly will be hurt that such a tactic was taken. At worst, the go -bet ween person cherishes the power trip involved, allowing himself to become a sort of arbiter in the conflict.

W e often are too quick to assume t hat a disagreement has no possible mutually acceptable solution. Talking about disagreements may result in opportunities to strengthen relationships and improve productivity. Obviously, talking problems through is not so easy. Confronting an issue may requ ire (1) exposing oneself to ridicule or rejection, (2) recognizing we may have contributed to the problem, and (3) willingness to change.

We can reduce stress, resolve challenges and increase productivity through effective dialogue. Such a conversation entails as much listeningas talking. W hile effective two-way

exchanges will happen naturally some of the time, for the most part they need to be carefully planned. There may be some pain -or at least moving us out of our comfort zones --involved in discussing challenging issues, but the rewards are satisfaction and improved long-term relationships.

When faced with challenges, we tend to review possible alternatives and come up with the best solution given the data at hand. Unwant ed options are discarded. W hile some decisions may take careful consideration, analysis, and even agony, we solve others almost instinctively. Our best solution becomes our position or stance in the matter. Our needs, concernsand fears all play a part in coming up with such a position. Misunderstanding and dissent can grow their ugly heads when our solution is not the same as those of others.

Several foes often combine to create contention:

Our first enemy is the natural need to want to explain our side first. After all, we reason, if they understand our perspective, they will come to the same conclusions we did.

Our second enemy is our ineffectiveness as listeners. Listening is much more than being quiet so we can have our turn. It involves a real effort to understand another person's perspective.

Our third enemy is fear. Fear that we will not get our way. Fear of losing something we cherish. Fear we will be made to look foolish or lose face. Fear of the truth ... that we may be wrong.

Our fourth enemy is the assumption that one of us h as to lose if the other is going to win: that such differences can only be solved competitively.

The good news is that there are simple and effective tools to spin positive solutions and strengthen relationships out of disagreements. But let not the simpli city of the concepts obscure the challenge of carrying them out consistently. Certainly life gives us plenty of opportunities to practice and attempt to

improve. However, the foes outlined above take effort to overcome.

Tool s f or I mpr ov e d Co mmu ni c at i on

Two principles have contributed greatly to the productive handling of disagreements. The first, "Seek first to understand, then to be understood," was introduced by Steven Covey, in Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.1 If we encourage others to explain their side first, they will be more apt to listen to ours.

For instance, I sometimes need to interview farm personnel about their feelings on various subjects. One day I came a cross a farm owner who was less than enthusiastic about my project.

It was clear from his words and tone that I would not be interviewing anyone on his farm, so I switched my focus to listening. The farmer shared concerns on a number of troublesome issues and we parted amiably. When I was on my way to my vehicle the farmer yelled, "Go ahead! "

"Go ahead and what?" I turned around and inquired. To my surprise he responded, "Go ahead and interview my workers." The Covey principle was at work.

The second principle, introduced by Roger Fisher and W illiam Ury in their seminal work, Getting to Yes ,2 is that people in disagreement should focus on their needs rather than on their positions. By concentrating on positions, we tend to underscore our disagreements. When we concentrate on needs, we find we have more in common than what we had assumed. Ury and Fisher suggest we attempt to satisfy the sum of both their needs and our needs.

W hen the light goes on we realize that it is not a zero sum game (where one person has to lose for the other to win). Nor is it necessary to solve disagreements with a lame compromise. Instead, often both parties can be winners. Individuals can learn how to keep communication lines open and solve challenges when things go wrong. Learning to disagree amicably and work through

problems is perhaps one of the most important interpersonal skills we can develop.

Putting it all together

If we come right out and tell someone, "I disagree," we are apt to alienate that person. Successful negotiators are more likely to label their intentions, such as a desire to ask a difficult question or provide a suggestion, and are less prone to label disagreement.3 Problems are likely, however, to increase if we put all our needs aside to focus on another persons perspective. The other party may think we have no needs and be quite taken back when we introduce them all of a sudden, almost as an afterthought.

In order to avoid such unproductive shock, I like the idea of briefly saying something along these lines. "I see that we look at this issue from different perspectives. W hile I want to share my needs and views with you later, let me first focus on your thoughts, needs, and observations ." At this point, we can now put our needs aside, attempt to truly listen, and say: "So, help me understand what your concerns are regarding ...."

That is the easy part. The difficulty comes in fulfilling such a resolution to really listen to resist the tendency to interrupt with objections no matter how unfounded some of the comments may be. Instead of telling someone that we understand (just so they can finish and give us a turn to present our perspective), we can be much more effective by revealing exactly what it is that we understand. All along we must resist, as we listen, the temptation to bring up our viewpoints and concerns. In trying to comprehend, we may need to put our understanding in terms of a question, or a tentative statement. This way we show true awareness.

W e may have to refine our statement until the other stakeholder approves it as a correct understanding of his position or need. It is necessary not only to understand, but for the other person to feel understood. Only now can we begin to explain our perspective and expect to be fully listened to. Once we have laid out our concerns, we can focus on a creative solution. If we have

had no history with someone, or a negative one, we need to use more caution when disagreeing. The potential for a disagreement to be side-railed into contention is always there. It helps if we have made goodwill deposits over time.

Involving a Third Party

Sometimes differences in organizational level, personality or self esteem among the participants in a disagreement require the participation of a third party. For instance, one supervisor had resorted to bullying and implied threats to get his way. "I would have gladly tried to find a way to help my supervisor achieve his goals," the subordinate explained through her tears. "But now I am so sensitized, I am afraid of talking to him."

Telling employees to work out their troubles on their own, grow up, or shake hands and get along may work occasionally, but most of the time the conflict will only be sent underground to resurface later in more destructive ways.

A better approach is to allow employees to meet with a third party, or me diat or ( whic h, in s ome c as es , may be a manager or t he f ar m owner), to assist them in their own resolution of the conflict.

All things being equal, an outside mediator has a greater chance of succeeding. An insider may be part of the problem, may be perceived as favoring one of the stakeholders, and the stakeholders may be hesitant to share confidential information with an insider.

If the insider is a supervisor, the mediator role becomes more difficult, as supervisors tend to become overly directive, taking more of an arbiter's role and forcing a decision upon the parties.

The conflict management process is more apt to succeed if stakeholders have respect for the mediator's integrity, impartiality, and ability. Respect for the mediator is important, so stakeholders will be on their best behavior, an important element in succ essful negotiation. Although not always the case, over -familiarity with an

inside mediator may negate this "best behavior" effect.

An outside mediator should treat issues with confidentiality. Exceptions are such instances as where illegal activities have taken place (e.g., sexual harassment).

All parties should be informed of exceptions to the confidentiality rule ahead of time. Any sharing of information based on the exceptions needs to be done on a need -to-know basis to minimize giving out information that could hurt one or both of the parties. Employees may be less hesitant to speak out when assured of confidentiality. Sometimes conflicts involve personal issues.

A much more sensitive situation involves the role of the mediator when stakeholders are not able to come to a negotiated resolution. Researchers have found that, in some instances, mediation works best when the third party is able to change roles, and in the event that mediation fails, become an arbiter. On the plus side, stakeholders may put the ir best foot forward and try hard to resolve issues. Unfortunately, while some mediators may be able to play both roles without manipulating the situation, the road is left wide open for abuse of power. Furthermore, individuals may feel coerced and not trust a mediator when what is said in confidence now may be taken against them later.

Mediation

Mediation helps stakeholders discuss issues, repair past injuries, and develop the tools needed to face disagreements effectively. Mediators may help participants glimpse at their blind spots, broaden their perspectives, and even muddle through the problem solving process. Yet, successful mediators remember that the challenges are owned by the stakeholders and do not attempt to short-circuit the process by solving c hallenges for them.

Mediators facilitate the process by:

Understanding each participants perspective through a pre-caucus. Increasing and evaluating participant interest in solving the

challenge through mediation.

Setting ground rules for improved communi cation. Coaching participants through the joint session. Equalizing power (e.g., between persons in different organizational levels). Helping participants plan for future interaction.

Understanding each participant s perspective through a pre caucus

The pre-caucus is a separate meeting between the mediator and each stakeholder before the stakeholders are brought together in a joint session. During the pre-caucus the mediator will briefly explain the issue of confidentiality and the mechanics of the mediation process so stakeholders will not be surprised or have a sense of being lost.

The mediator also should offer stakeholders the opportunity for regular caucusing (a meeting away from the other stakeholder) any time they feel a need for it. It is important t hat stakeholder control is emphasized throughout the process. Participants should not agree on something just for the sake of agreement. If there are yet unmet needs, these should be brought up. Sometimes, a few changes in a potential solution can make the difference between an agreement that will fail or succeed.

W hile there are hundreds of factors that can affect the successful resolution of a conflict, the pre -caucus is one of the pillars of conflict management .4 It is especially useful when dealing with deep-seated interpersonal conflict management and mediation.

Although any talking between the mediator and one of the stakeholders alone can be perceived as suspect and poten tially influence the neutrality of the mediator, such fears assume a mediator-directive approach where the third party wields much power and often acts as a quasi -arbitrator. When the mediation process is understood--from the beginning--as one where each of the stakeholders retains control over the outcome, less importance is given to mediator neutrality.

The pre-caucus provides each stakeholder an opportunity to be heard and understood. One of the reasons why conflict situations are so challenging, is the natural tendency of stakeholders to each want to express their respective perspectives first which to some degree takes place in the pre -caucus. The more deep -seated and emotional the conflict, the greater this need.

At a dairy operation, I had just been i ntroduced to one of the stakeholders by the farm owner. As soon as the farmer left us alone to begin our pre-caucus, the stakeholder broke into tears. A similar situation took place at a row crop farm enterprise where one of the farm managers began to cry, ostensibly because of other issues pressing heavily upon him. Had thes e men come immediately into a joint meeting with their respective contenders, their feelings of vulnerability might just as easily have turned into anger and defensiveness.

One manager told me that the pre-caucus would be very short with a milker who was not a man of many words. The milker spoke for almost two hours. By the time we finished, he felt understood and had gained confidence, and by the time we were into the middle of the joint session with the other stakeholder, this same employee was even laughing when it was appropriate. I have found that these "silent types" will often open up during a pre -caucus.

When a stakeholder feels understood, an enormous emotional burden is lifted; stress and defensiveness are reduced. This makes people more confident and receptive to listen to the other party.

Separating the people from the conflict. W inslade and Monk in Narrative Mediation argue that while people are theoretically free in terms of what they say in a conversation, most often stakeholders feel their responses are influenced by the remarks of the other. They often see themselves entrapped within the conflict cycle.

W inslade and Monk ask individuals how they might have felt forced by the conflict to do or say things that they wish they had not. Or, how the conflict has affected them negativel y in other

ways. By placing the blameon the conflict itself, the mediator allows the stakeholders to save face and slowly distance themselves from the conflict-saturated story. Such a situation can help stakeholders detach themselves from the conflict long enough to see that each has a choice as to whether he wants to continue feeding the conflict. The authors further suggest that if the mediator listens with an ethic of curiosity , unexpected benefits are likely to arise. Instead of merely listening to confirm hunches and reconcile facts, the third party realizes that stakeholders often bring to mediation an olive branch along with their anger and despair. Thus, stakeholders often hold the very keys to the reconstruction of broken relationships and to the solving of challenges. But the mediator has to have enough confidence in people and in the process to allow these issues to surface and to be on the lookout for them so they do not go unnoticed. 5

During the pre-caucus, the mediator notes as many issues as possible from each stakeholder (they often overlap considerably) and later introduces them in a systematic fashion for the stakeholders to discuss in the joint session. The more issues raised, the greater the opportunity for discussion and the less likelihood that important issues will be left out.

Increasing and evaluating participant interest in solving challenge through mediation

There seems to be a pattern in deep-seated organizational interpersonal conflict: each stakeholder is overly distracted with the stress of the conflict, has difficulty sleeping at night, and is generally thinking of quitting. Sometimes individuals may be in denial about the negative effect that contention has in their lives. One manager claimed that he just got angry and exploded, but that his anger did not last long. He explained that he did no t hold grudges, that by the next day he had put aside any bad feelings for the other person. During a mediation session this same manger admitted that a recent confrontation with the other stakeholder had made him so angry it left him sick for a couple of days. Part of the role of the mediator in meeting individually with each stakeholder is to help individuals visualize a life without that

stress.

In the process of meeting with the stakeholders, the mediator can make a more informed determination as to whe ther to proceed with mediation or recommend arbitration or another approach. As effective as mediation can be, under certain circumstances more harm than good can result from bringing parties together. The purpose of mediation is not to simply provide a safe place for stakeholders to exchange insults!

Tr ans f or mat iv e opp or t un it ies . I n The Pr o mi s e of Medi at i on , Bus h and Folger suggest that mediators watch for and recognize transformative opportunities in terms of recognition that can be offered between partic ipants. Such recognition may invol ve compliments or showing understanding, empathy, or other forms of mutual validation. 6 A fruit grower, almost as an aside, had something positive to say about the other party, "One thing I really value about the farm manager is that he shows pride in his work -something I really admired in my father." The grower reacted negatively to the idea of sharing this with the farm manager, yet decided to do so his own during the joint session.

Looking for the positive. W hile a number of issues can affect the likely success of a joint mediation session, perhaps none is as telling as asking each stakeholder what they value in the other contender. This question should be asked after the participant has had a chance to vent, and the mediator has shown understanding for the challenges from the stakeholder's perspective.

There is a human tendency not to find anything of value in a person with whom there has been deep-seated contention. After a person feels understood by the mediator, there is a greater likelihood that the stakeholder will see a little light of good in his contender.

W ithout this tiny light of hope, without this little olive branch, there is no point in proceeding. If there is nothing of significance that one person can value about the other, more harm than good can come out of the mediation. And it is not enough to say that the other person "is always on time," "drives a nice pick up," "is

attractive," or "does not smell."

Sometimes one of the stakeholders will be more noble than the other, a little more prone to see good in the other. On one occasion, I had already met with such an individual in a pre caucus and asked the second stakeholder, dur ing his pre-caucus, for the positive characteristics of the first. W hen the answer was none, I shared the positive things that were said about him by the first employee and asked again. Because stakeholders want to seem reasonable, especially after heari ng something positive about themselves, I was surprised by a second refusal by the more reticent stakeholder to find anything of value about the other. W ell, if there is nothing positive you can say about the other employee, there is no purpose in attempt ing a conflict management session together, I explained. I suggested a short break. W hen we returned, the taciturn stakeholder had prepared a long list of positive attributes about the other employee. I have since realized, that if a contender is not read y to say something positive about another, an additional pre -caucus may be needed.

Repairing past injuries. Occasionally, it helps to role play to identify potential pitfalls ahead of time. For instance, at one farm operation, a manager's angry outbursts w ere well known. Martin, the manager, had minimized the seriousness of his problem. A co mediator role-played the other party in the contention. "Martin," she began. "W hen you get angry at me, shout at me and use profanity, I feel very badly."

"W ell, I am s o sorry I have used bad language wi th you and been angry at you," Martin began nicely. "But ...." And then Martin began to excuse himself and to place conditions on controlling his anger. At this moment I had to interrupt. An apology with a comma or a but is not a true apology, but merely a statement of justification, I expl ained. In total frustration Martin turned to me and said, "Look, everyone has their style. Some people deal with dis agr eeme nt t his way or t hat . I am an e xper t in int i midat ion . I f I can't use intimidation, what can I do so I don't get run over? Am I supposed to just sit here and tell him how nice he is and not bring

up any of the areas of disagreement?"

When mediators have done their homework during the pre -caucus, the joint session can be very positive. This case involving Martin was one of the most difficult I had ever dealt with, yet once the joint session began, both managers did most of the talking. They were extremely cordial, attentive, and amicabl e, showing understanding for each other. Although the problems were not solved from one day to the next, a year later there had been much positive progress.

Set t i ng gr oun d r ul es f or i mpr ov ed c o mmu ni c at i on

Individuals attempt to cultivate an identity or projection of who they are. For instance, a person may see herself as an intellectual, another may see himself as an outdoors person, a cowboy, or an artist. Such identity labels are just a small part of a much deeper and complex set of traits that any individual would value.

An important part of mindful interpersonal communication is the mutual validation of such identities, through a process of identity negotiation. People tend to build bonds with those who seem supportive of the identity they attempt to project. 7 Such mutual validation is one of the keys to effective interpersonal relations. Lack of validation normally plays a vital role in interpersonal conflict, as well. Some of the most hurtful things another individual can say to us, are an attack on our self image or valued identity.

Peopl e do not just project identities of who they are, but also the personal qualities of who they wish to become. W hen a person's weaknesses are exposed, he may reason that it is not worth trying to pretend anymore. Because those who are closest to us are more likely to have seen our weaknesses, we may first stop pretending with family, close friends, and people at work. This attitude also plays an important part in interpersonal conflict.

One of the important roles of a mediator is to help stakeholders who have crossed the line and stopped pretending, to re -cross

back, and thus get a second chance at a relationship. If we have decided to thus change our behavior, it helps to clear ly state our intentions ahead of time, so that our new and corrected behavior is not misunderstood.

Coaching and modeling effective interaction styles is an ongoing task for the mediator. The objective is for stakeholders to increase their understanding of effective interpersonal relations. Before conflicting parties meet, it helps to set ground rules that will help parties avoid hurtful comments, and even increase positive validating ones. Ground rules will help the conflict from escalating and save time once mediation is under way. It is not the role of the mediator to simply allow the contenders to exchange cynical remarks, insults, name calling, and threats in a psychologically safer environment. Nor should the mediator allow contenders to drag her into the controversy. Instead, the mediator may have to remind employees to direct their comments to (and keep visual contact with) the other person involved in the disagreement.

Overly vague or broad statements such as, "You are inconsiderate," or, "You are overbearing," do little to facilitate mutual understanding. Specific issues, or events, and what motivated each to act in certain ways, may be more useful. In the pre-caucus, ask the stakeholder using such sweeping statements for examples of times when the o ther individual acted in inconsiderate, overbearing, untrustworthy or selfish ways. These behaviors can later be discussed in the joint session.

Name-calling can have a very negative effect. For instance, a Mexican dairy empl oyee called another employee a racist. That is a pretty big word, with very strong connotations. The other stakeholder, a Portuguese milker, was very hurt by the use of such a word. The mediator stopped the conversation to make sure all were defining the word in the same way. "Are you s aying that this milker treats you different because you are Mexican and he is Portuguese?" After the term was well explai ned and a few more questions asked, the Mexican milker ended up apologizi ng, and the Portuguese employee had the opportunity to tell a story that illustrated he was not racist. It is not the role of the mediator to

reject such as accusation without allowing stakeholders to speak what is in their mind.

Beside name-calling, the use of other labels can increase contention. Calling someone by a label, even when the person identifies with such (e.g., a person's nationality), can be offensive dependi ng on the tone and context. A more subtle use of labeling, one that can have the same negative effect, is describing our own perspective as belonging to a desirable label (e.g., a particularly cherished philosophy, principle or belief), while assigning that of another to an undesirable one.

Stakeholders also look for ways to enlist even theoretical others into supporting their views. They may attempt to inflate the importance of their opinions with such statements as, "everyone else agrees with me when I say that ...." Or, attribute a higher source of authority to their words: "According to such and such (an author, or respected person)..." A stakehold er may wish to discount the opinion of others by speaking of their experience: "In my twenty years of experience ..." Once again, the tone and context of the conversation may make some of these statements appropriate in one circumstance and not in anot her. People may resort to dysfunctional tactics when the force of their argument does not stand on its own merits.

Along with labeling, threats--both direct and veiled--can reduce a stakeholder's negotiating power. W hen these intimidation tactics are bluffs, then the loss of negotiation power is further magnified.

The mediator may also coach employees into owning up to their feelings by using "I" statements. 8 "I feel upset when you change my radio station while I am milking," is preferable to "You make me angry when ...."

Only one person should speak at a time, while the other makes every possible effort to understand what is being said. One defensive tactic is to change the topic. W hile sometimes two topics are so closely related that they cannot be separated, generally new topics can be placed on a "list of other matters" to

be brought up later.

W orkers involved in highly charged conflict situations frequently try to ridicule their contenders by distorting or exaggerating what has been s ai d. I c al l t his di s t or t ed mi r r or i ng . For i ns t anc e, an employee may inaccurately mirror a comment, such as: "So you are telling me that you never want me to... ," or, "I get it, you think you are the only one who ...," "You used to be [something positive] but now [negative statement]," "It s eems that you arealways ... these days."

Participants may sometimes seek shelter from a true give -and-take with such statements as, "That's just the way I am," 9 or, "Can't you take a joke?" W hile a mediator cannot force someone out of his shell, he may help participants understand the detracting effects these statements may have. The earlier the mediator disallows distortions or manipulative tactics, the sooner employees will realize that this is not a verbal battle.

A mediator may also need to coach employees on how to formulate questions and comments. Participants need to talk without putting each other on the defensive or coming across as accusatory. Especially when under the stress of a conflict, people will be quite sensitive to intended and non-intended statements of double meaning. A critical role for the mediator may be to ask for clarification or coach stakeholders in properly reflecting statements.

Coaching participants through the joint session.

The time has come to bring both stakeholders together into a joint session. A mechanical aspect to mediation that is extremely powerful is the seating arrangement . Have the two parties sit facing each other such that they are in a position to have good eye contact, yet making sure there is enough space between them so their personal space is not violated. This arrangement underscores the message that they are there to talk to each other. Because people who are in conflict often d iscount the other person, having to exchange eye contact can be powerful medicine toward reconciliation. A table may be appropriate in some

circumstances.

The mediator sits far enough away that stakeholders would have to turn their heads if they wished to make eye contact with him. It is not easy for the stakeholders to check if they have "scored a point," or to enlist the mediator to their side. If the stakeholders make such an attempt, the mediator reminds them that the person they need to convince is the other party.

The seating arrangement described above is such a powerful tool, that I have seen people apologize to each other, be more considerate, call each other by name, and use many positive behaviors even when the complete mediation approach outlined in this chapter was not used. The seating arrangement is a second mediation pillar. Both of these pillars are integral to the Party Directed Mediation conflict management approach. (You may wish to download the full-length book, Party-Directed Mediation, 2nd Edition, 2009, from the link above. It is a public service of the University of California).

Figure 13-1. Seating arrangement for participants (red) and mediator (blue). Table (yellow) is optional.

The mediator can also encourage participants to call each other by name. This can be a difficult thing at first. People who have been contending tend to discount the other person and instead the person "he," "she," "the boss," or something other than the person's name. Addressing someone by name acknowledge s and

validates the other person's humanness.

Successfully dealing with any issue under contention (e.g., the offering and accepting of an apology, or having participants agree on how they will deal with a future challenge) can be very energizing and give the participants the confidence they need to face the next difficulty that comes up.

It is good to talk about the past. A discussion of past behaviors is essentialto analyze patterns of conflict and help participants find constructive ways of handling futu re disagreements. W ithout understanding the past, it is hard to prepare for the future. At some point, however, the focus of discussion turns to that of future behaviors, rather than past injuries. The sooner the participants can focus on the future, the g reater the chances of successful resolution. 10

One of the roles of the mediator is to encourage participants to be more specific in their agreements, to help question potenti al landmines, and to encourage stakeholders to recapitulate what seems to have been agreed upon. W hen dealing with more difficult challenges, part of the role of the mediator is to keep the parties from becoming discouraged by showing them how far they hav e progressed.

Stakeholders can be taught to utilize the concepts introduced earlier, in terms of participant positions versus needs. Recall the case of Beth and Carlos at the beginning of the chapter, where each of their stances appeared incompatible with that of the other (i.e., whether Carlos should yield to the prescribed overtime request).

Mediators help dissipate contentious feelings by teaching s tak eholder s how to find c r eative ways to ac hieve the s u m1 1 of the needs (theirs and the opposing ones). By going past an obvious stance and looking into needs, we may find that (1) Beth wanted the tomato harvester repairs completed before harvest --which is scheduled to begin early next week, while (2) Carlos wanted to be home to celebrate his daughter's quinceaera (coming of age

party) Friday evening.

Once the manager and mechanic understand each other's needs, they can agree on a solutionperhaps the mechanic can work the overtime on W ednesday and Thursday. This case may seem simple and the solution obvious except, perhaps, to Beth and Carlos before they explored eac h other's needs. The approach works well for more complex issues, too.

Separating position from needs, in such a way that parties attempt to understand each others needs is another mediation pillar.

Mediators should not be in too big of a hurry to move participants from their position statement and explanation of their fears and needs, to problem resolution. It is vital to first truly understand the nature of the challenges that seem to divide individuals. Allowing stakeholders to hold an initial position allows each to feel understood and to retain a sense of control and ownership over the process. A great tool is to ha ve stakeholders explain, to the best of their ability, the position of the other.

Stakeholders tend to discount each other by refusing to even acknowledge that the other has a position. For instance, a cook was asked to recognize that the field foreman nee ded meals to arrive on time to the crews. Yet the cook could not focus away from the fact that there were meals being wasted each day. You see, its his fault because W e are not talking about faults at this time, we just want you to state the perspective of the field foreman, the mediator interrupted. W ell, you see, he thinks that he can get away wi th .

The cook had to be stopped over a dozen times, because it was so difficult for him to even state (and thus validate) the others position. Once he stopped evading the process and gave the position of the field foreman, and the field foreman did the same for the cook, they quickly came to a solution that benefited

everyone and saved the grower money. A missing step here, one that may have helped smooth the transition between an internal focus and stating the other stakeholder's position, would have been to first encourage the stakeholders to ask fact finding and non-judgmental questions of each other. 12 An agreement was made that the field foreman woul d radio the cook with an exact meal count for the day. Because the cook had an exact count, he had fewer meals to cook and thus could produce them faster. A structured way to clarify positions and needs for a two -person negotiation is outlined in Sidebar 13 -2. Sidebar 13-2. Position vs. needs 13 in conflict management

Position A

Position B Need B-1 Need B-2 Need B-3

Need A-1 Need A-2

1.

Participants divide a paper, chalkboard, or wipe board into four sections (as shown above). 2. Participants seek to understand and record each others position (i.e., stance). 3. Participants are free to restate, modify, or further clarify their position at any time. 4. Participants now seek to understand and record each others needs. Taking the time to ask effective questions of each other (see Chapter 12) is an important part of reaching such understanding. 5. Participants brainstorm ways of fulfilling all the needs (in some cases solutions may not be obvious at once and stakeholders may want to sleep on it). For brainstorming to be effective, possible solutions should not be evaluated at the time, and even outlandish and extreme possible solutions should be entertained. Only later, are these solutions examined for the positive and negative factors that they contribute. 6. Participants should resist solutions where they no longer have to interact with each other. To avoid each other takes little creativity and is seldom the best solution. Instead, participants need to seek creative, synergetic solutions. 7. Tentative co-authored agreements are evaluated and refined in light of potentially difficult obstacles that such solutions may yet need to endure. 8. Agreementsincluding a possible co-authored new positionare recorded. 9. Participants consent to evaluate results at pre-determined time periods. 10. Fine tune agreements as needed and work on other challenges together.

Stakeholders should not come to the table ready to expose or impose thei r solution. In negotiation it is critical for stakeholders to first focus on defining and understanding the nature of the challenge. It is often when stakeholders are not able to move past their positions or stances that negotiations break down. Also, stakeholders want to feel that they have some control over the decision-making process. This is hard to do when decisions are made by

others before the problems are fully explored (Chapter 17).

Each stakeholder needs to be vigilant that a solution will meet the other person's needs, as well as their own. Stakeholders need to remember, that for the most part, the only good solutions are those that will work for all the individuals involved.

Furthermore, sometimes people will yield to another as a test. These individuals want to see if the other stakeholder has the minimum amount of care for anyone other than himself. As a tactic, setting a trap to see if someone will get caught, is hardly a good i dea, of course. The more emotion involved, the less likely that the other stakeholder will step back. Another manipulative approach is for a stakeholder to "give in" just to be able to hold it against the other later on.

Negotiation will not be satisfactor y when a person is more intent in:

punishing another rather than coming to an agreement or modifying future behavior winning rather than solving the challenge

Sometimes negotiation is attempted but peoples basic needs are incompatible. This may be especially so when no distinction can be made between a persons need and her position. When negotiation has failedfor whatever reasonsa clear need for resolving the dispute through arbitration may develop. Bush and Folger suggest, however, that if a doo r is left open for continued conversation, and if individual empowerment and mutual recognition have taken place, then mediation was not a failure. Much more of a failure, they argue, is for a mediator to be so focused on having stakeholders come to an agr eement that the agreement is forced, reducing the chances that it will be long lasting. 14

Equali zing power

Participants may bring different amounts of power into a situation. As long as both are interested in negotiating a solution, power is essentially equalized. The effective mediator helps parties listen and communicate with each other. You may also need to draw out an employee who is having difficulty expressing himself.

A stance from either party indicating a lack of interest (1) in talking about the problem, or (2) in the other persons needs, would indicate unwillingness to be involved in the negotiation process. Mediators can suggest that the joint session take place in a location that is neutral and private--without telephone or any other sort of interruptions.

Helping participants plan for future interaction

It is easier for employees to improve communication when aided by a competent mediator. Part of the responsibility of the mediator is to help employees anticipate some of the challenges they will face in the future. One difficulty is to take the time to listen and communicate. Principal among the needed skills, is for sensitive listening. It is difficult to always be on the alert for such sensitive listening and interaction as has been discussed throughout this and the last chapter.

It sometimes takes years for employees to get into a pattern of negative interaction. It is unlikely that one session will cure this no matter how outstanding the mediator or the participants involved. One or more follow -up sessions with the mediator may help participants refine skills and evaluate progress made.

Arbitration

The supervisor as an arbiter may do everything a mediator does but, at the end, will make a judgment that the employees are expected to follow. It may be clear from the outset that employees expect the supervisor to take the role of an arbiter. Or, it may become increasingly evident as mediation is taking place, that an arbiter will be needed. The supervisor needs to clearly communicate his role. If the role changes, workers need understand that, too.

Because it is normally preferable for all parties involved to have a conflict solved at the mediation rather than arbitration stage, it helps for a supervisor to be slow in taking on the role of an arbiter, especially when these two individuals will have to continue to work together. During the process of listening to the various perspect ives, and before making a decision, an arbiter may wish to offer employees the opportunity to work out their own problem, or to work out difficulties through mediation.

At times, a judge and a judgment are needed. Supervisors who have to arbitrate should a void trying to make both parties happy with the decision. Most of the time it is simply not possible. It may be an admirable goal for mediation, but not for arbitration. Instead, the arbitrator is required to be impartial (there is no room for favoritism) and fair (even if this seems one sided).

The well-loved story of wise Solomon of old is an early example of arbitration: Two harlots had given birth. Some time after that, one of the women, while she was sleeping, rolled over her child and suffocated him. W hen she woke up that night and found the dead infant, she traded him for that of the other. When the second woman woke up, she found the dead child by her. But when morning came, she could clearly behold that this was not her child. Each woman

claimed to be the true mother of the baby that was still alive, and took their conflict before King Solomon. The king simply asked for a sword, and then ordered: "Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other." W hile the false mother thought this was a fine idea, the true mother asked the king to save the child --even if this meant giving the infant to the other woman. Solomon thus determined who the real mother was, and returned the child to her.15Unfortunately, Solomons pretended initial solution to the contending mothers (to divide the baby in half) would often be carried out by supervisors in their modern day arbitrator role. In their effort to try an d please both workers, they create a compromise that is often unfair, and frequently unworkable.

It takes little skill, and even less strength of character, to arbitrate in this manner. Instead, a supervisor who arbitrates with fairness is more apt to be r espected by employees in the long run. After difficulties are worked out, employees often find that their relationships have been strengthened.

Summary
W herever there are choices to be made, differences may provide challenges or opportunities. One difficulty is the possibility that differences will result in increased contention. Supervisors may have to act as mediators and arbitrators from time to time. The advantage of mediation is maintaining responsibility for problem solving and conflict resolu tion at the level of those who own the challenge. Selecting an outside mediator often makes sense. Several roles taken on by the mediator include understanding each participants perspective; setting ground rules for improved communication; coaching partic ipants on effective interaction styles; equalizing power; and helping participants plan for future interaction.

W hen the supervisor acts in the role of an arbitrator, it is more important to make a fair judgment than to try to please all workers involved.

Chapter 13 References

1. Covey, S. (1989). Seven Habits of Highly Effective People . New York: Simon & Schuster. 2. Fisher, R., Ury, W ., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (2nd ed.). Penguin Books, and Deetz, S. A., & Stevenson, S. L. (1986). Managing Interpersonal Communication . New York: Harper & Row Publishers. 3. Rackham, N. (1999). The Behavior of Successful Negotiators (3rd ed.) (p. 348).Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases . Edited by Lewicki, Saun ders & Minton. Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

4. Billikopf, G. E. Contributions of Caucusing and Pre -Caucusing to Mediation (in press). Group Facilitation: A Research and Appli cations Journal . 5. W inslade, J., & Monk, G. (2000). Narrative Mediation: A New Approach to Conflict Resolution. San Francisco: Jossey -Bass Publishers. 6. Bus h, R. A. , Bar uc h & Folger , J . P. ( 1994) . The Pr o mis e of Mediat ion . San Fr anc is c o: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 7. Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating Across Cultures . New York: The Guilford Press. 8. Deetz, S. A., & Stevenson, S. L. (1986). Managing Interpersonal Communication . New York: Harper & Row Publishers. 9. W alton, R. E. (1987). Managing Conflict: Interpersonal Dialogue and Third -Party Roles(2nd ed.) (p. 108). Addison -W esley Publishing Company. 10. Robert, M. (1982). Managing Conflict From the Inside Out (pp. 119-128). University Associates. Excellent suggestions are also provided on how to manage conflict among groups. 11. Fisher, R., Ury, W ., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (2nd ed.). Penguin Books, and Deetz, S. A., & Stevenson, S. L. (1986) Managing Interpersonal Communication . New York: Harper & Row Publishers. 12. Bodine, N. (2001, July). Founder and member of Boa rd of Directors of The Workplace Institute (now Center for Collaborative Solutions ) personal communication. 13. No distinction is intended between the concept of need and that of interest . In chapter 17, where we further discuss some of these issues, the terms are used interchangeably. 14. Bus h, R. A. , Bar uc h & Folger , J . P. ( 1994) . The Pr o mis e of Me diat ion . San Fr anc is c o: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 15. 1Kings 3:16-28.

External links on conflict management:

I ACM

Academy of Management

Campus ADR - Conflict Management

SSRN Abstract Part y-Directed Mediation

Wikipedia Party-Directed Mediation

Mediate.com Party-Directed Mediation

Answers.com Part y-Directed Mediation

UC Repository

American Vegetable Gr ower - Conflict Management

Nation Master - Party-Directed Mediation

VisWiki Party-Directed Mediation

Dairy Today - Conflict Management

Asociacin de Mediacin para la Pacificacin de Conflictos

Mediacin Familiar - Chile

Idealawg Party-Directed Mediation

FiledBy

Sanda Kaufman

Revista Futuros - Mediacin Interpersonal

Library of Congress Control Number 2001092378

2001, 2009, by The Regents of the University of California

All rights reserved. Printing this electronic Web page on conflict management is permitted for personal, educational or non-commercial use (such that people are not charged for the materials) as long as the author and the University of California are credited, and the page is printed in its entirety. We do not charge for reprints, but appreciate knowing how you are making use of this paper. Please send us a message through the E-mail link at the top of this page. You may prefer to download the PDF version of this chapter, from the yellow link section above, or download the complete book on conflict management for free, Party-Directed Mediation, 2nd Edition, 2009. That page also includes instructions for providing electronic copies for your

students or clients at no cost. This is a public service of the University of California.

Labor Management in Ag Table of Contents

20 August 2009

About Conflict Management

By Priti Ramjee, eHow Contributor

An employee not informed of a decision may be a situation for conflict management.

When a person is opposed by another because his needs and goals are different, he faces conflict. Feelings of anger, frustration, hurt, anxiety or fear almost always accompany conflict. Conflict management identifies and handles the conflict using effective communicating, problem-solving and understanding each person's interest to negotiate fairly.

Other People Are Reading

About Conflict Resolution

Conflict & Negotiation Processes in Organizations

Print this article

1. Purpose of Conflict Management

o

Conflict management is a systematic process to find a satisfying outcome between conflicted parties. With conflict management, a team, group and organization function more effectively and achieve goals. Without it, group performance is affected. Conflict management is less about identifying a problem than it is about establishing an ongoing process with leaders dedicated to creating open communication channels, developing productive work relationships, encouraging participation, improving organizational processes and procedures and helping individuals develop "win-win" outcomes.

Situations Requiring Conflict Management

o

The workplace can create a situation between co-workers, or between an employer and an employee as a result of poor communication. For example, an employee may not be informed of a decision or does not understand the reasons for a decision. She may be conflicted because of a rumor. Perhaps, she has misunderstood the role that management has assigned to her. If management shows the employee a lack of support, the situation can grow requiring the need for conflict management.
Sponsored Links

Study MBA Part-Time

Online lectures - Expert Tutors HD Videos, 24/7 Access www.StudyInterActive.org/MBA

Process of Conflict Management

o

The process of conflict management involves understanding the nature of the conflict, who is involved and initiating resolution. In the case of conflict between an employer and employee, the employer initiates conflict management by arranging a time to meet with the employee and a human resources consultant or facilitator. All parties should understand that the purpose of managing the conflict is to find a solution. Action points, if required, should be completed within a certain time. Once the situation has been resolved, the cause should be discussed with measures to stop the situation from reoccurring.

Evolution of Conflict Management

o

Prior to the 1940s, conflict was considered counterproductive to organizational goals. The conflict management style was conflict avoidance leaving the conflicted party to feel

slighted. Since the mid-1970s, experts believe that a conflict-free, cooperative organization tends to become stagnant and unresponsive to market change. As a result, a new position on conflict management emerged as an interactive approach encouraging conflict to enhance performance in the workplace through conflict management. (See Reference 4)
Sponsored Links

Conflict Styles Trainerswww.RiverhouseEpress.com

Powerful dashboard to manage users as they take online inventory.

Instant Grammar Checkerwww.Grammarly.com/Grammar_Check

Correct All Grammar Errors And Enhance Your Writing. Try Now!

Marriage With Foreign MenAfroIntroductions.com/Marriage

Foreign Men Seek African Ladies For Love & Marriage. Join Free Today!

Project Management Coursewww.rsustconsultancy.com/

Register for the September set of the UST Project Management Course

Related Searches

Conflict Resolution Methods What Is Conflict Management Communication Skills Conflict Resolution Skills Conflict in Workplace More from eHow
Five Types of Conflict What Is Conflict Perspective? More to Explore Surprising Causes of Infidelity(YouBeauty.com) How to Improve Communication Skills (mom.me)
What's this?

References

Free Management Library: Basics of Conflict Management The CEDA Meta-Profession Project: Conflict Management T.A.H. Performance Consultants, LLC Reference for Business: Conflict Management and Negotiation BizCommunity: Conflict Management in the Workplace
Read more: About Conflict Management | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_7750640_conflictmanagement.html#ixzz25UnEvvu9