Becoming a part of solution.

It is not easy to proceed further when dispute/conflict occur in team work in work space or
conflict with relatives. Most of see our self as part or trapped by problem and one such is conflict issue
with ambient/ people around you!!!

I hope to bring a solution through this article if you wish solution this is my gift to you.

Conflict (what is it?)
While no single definition of conflict exists, most definitions involve the following factors: 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.
In short
People differ, so they:
see things differently
want different things
have different thinking styles, which prompts them to disagree
are predisposed to disagree
have different personalities
have different status
have ideological and philosophical differences
have different goals
have different approaches
are influenced by fear, force, fairness or funds

Conflict is classified into the following four types:
Interpersonal conflict refers to a conflict between two individuals. This occurs typically due to
how people are different from one another. We have varied personalities which usually results
to incompatible choices and opinions. Apparently, it is a natural occurrence which can
eventually help in personal growth or developing your relationships with others. In addition,
coming up with adjustments is necessary for managing this type of conflict. However, when
interpersonal conflict gets too destructive, calling in a mediator would help so as to have it
resolved.
Intrapersonal conflict occurs within an individual. The experience takes place in the persons
mind. Hence, it is a type of conflict that is psychological involving the individuals thoughts,
values, principles and emotions. Interpersonal conflict may come in different scales, from the
simpler mundane ones like deciding whether or not to go organic for lunch to ones that can
affect major decisions such as choosing a career path. Furthermore, this type of conflict can be
quite difficult to handle if you find it hard to decipher your inner struggles. It leads to
restlessness and uneasiness, or can even cause depression. In such occasions, it would be best
to seek a way to let go of the anxiety through communicating with other people. Eventually,
when you find yourself out of the situation, you can become more empowered as a person.
Thus, the experience evoked a positive change which will help you in your own personal growth.
Intragroup conflict is a type of conflict that happens among individuals within a team. The
incompatibilities and misunderstandings among these individuals lead to an intragroup conflict.
It is arises from interpersonal disagreements (e.g. team members have different personalities
which may lead to tension) or differences in views and ideas (e.g. in a presentation, members of
the team might find the notions presented by the one presiding to be erroneous due to their
differences in opinion). Within a team, conflict can be helpful in coming up with decisions which
will eventually allow them to reach their objectives as a team. However, if the degree of conflict
disrupts harmony among the members, then some serious guidance from a different party will
be needed for it to be settled.
Intergroup conflict takes place when a misunderstanding arises among different teams within
an organization. For instance, the sales department of an organization can come in conflict with
the customer support department. This is due to the varied sets of goals and interests of these
different groups. In addition, competition also contributes for intergroup conflict to arise. There
are other factors which fuel this type of conflict. Some of these factors may include a rivalry in
resources or the boundaries set by a group to others which establishes their own identity as a
team.
Conflict may seem to be a problem to some, but this isnt how conflict should be perceived. On
the other hand, it is an opportunity for growth and can be an effective means of opening up
among groups or individuals. However, when conflict begins to draws back productivity and
gives way to more conflicts, then conflict management would be needed to come up with a
resolution.


Conditions creating conflict situations
According to Kirchoff and Adams (1982), there are four distinct conflict conditions, i.e., high
stress environments, ambiguous roles and responsibilities, multiple boss situations, and
prevalence of advanced technology.
Filley (1975) identified nine main conditions which could initiate conflict situations in an
organization. These are:
1. Ambiguous jurisdiction, which occurs when two individuals have responsibilities which are
interdependent but whose work boundaries and role definitions are not clearly specified.
2. Goal incompatibility and conflict of interest refer to accomplishment of different but mutually
conflicting goals by two individuals working together in an organization. Obstructions in
accomplishing goals and lack of clarity on how to do a job may initiate conflicts. Barriers to goal
accomplishment arise when goal attainment by an individual or group is seen as preventing
another party achieving their goal.
3. Communication barriers, as difficulties in communicating can cause misunderstanding, which
can then create conflict situations.
4. Dependence on one party by another group or individual.
5. Differentiation in organization, where, within an organization, sub-units are made responsible
for different, specialized tasks. This creates separation and introduces differentiation. Conflict
situations could arise when actions of sub-units are not properly coordinated and integrated.
6. Association of the parties and specialization. When individuals specialized in different areas
work in a group, they may disagree amongst themselves because they have different goals,
views and methodologies owing to their various backgrounds, training and experiences.
7. Behaviour regulation. Organizations have to have firm regulations for individual behaviour to
ensure protection and safety. Individuals may perceive these regulations differently, which can
cause conflict and negatively affect output.
8. Unresolved prior conflicts which remain unsettled over time create anxiety and stress, which can
further intensify existing conflicts. A manager's most important function is to avoid potential
harmful results of conflict by regulating and directing it into areas beneficial for the
organization.
Conflict as a process
Conflict is a dynamic process. In any organization a modest amount of conflict can be useful in
increasing organizational effectiveness. Tosi, Rizzo and Carroll (1986) consider the stages
involved in the conflict process, from inception to end, as sequential in nature, namely:
(i) the conflict situation,
(ii) awareness of the situation,
(iii) realization,
(iv) manifestation of conflict,
(v) resolution or suppression of conflict, and
(vi) after-effects of a conflict situation.
CONDITIONS LEADING TO CONFLICT SITUATIONS IN ORGANIZATIONS
Ambiguous jurisdictions
Conflict of interest
Communication barriers
Dependence on one party
Differentiation in organization
Association of the parties
Behavior regulation
Performance expectations
Competition for limited resources
Lack of cooperation
Unresolved prior conflicts
EFFECTS OF CONFLICTS
There is always two heads to a coin likewise conflict two has two heads
Positive effects:
Diffuses more serious conflicts
Stimulates a search for new facts or resolutions
Increases group cohesion and performance
Demonstrates measure of power or ability
Negative effects:
Hinders smooth working
Hampers the decision making process
Causes the formation of competing coalitions
Reduces productivity


Elements of a conflict
Organizational conflicts usually involve three elements, which have to be appropriately matched
through necessary organizational arrangements in order to resolve the conflict (Turner and
Weed, 1983).
Power is the capacities and means that people have at their disposal to get work done. Power includes
budgetary discretion, personal influence, information, time, space, staff size and dependence on others.
If used efficiently, power creates an atmosphere of cooperation, but can generate conflicts when
misused, withheld or amassed.
Organizational demands are the people's expectations regarding a person's job performance.
Usually such expectations are high, and making them rather unrealistic.
When these expectations are not fulfilled, people feel disheartened, angry, let down or cheated.
Consequently, conflict situations can arise.
Worth refers to a person's self-esteem. People want to prove their worth in the organization.
Superiors control employees' pay, performance rating, performance and appraisal, etc. How much of
these are received by a person reflects their worth. An individual may also feel loss of worth if some
basic needs are not fulfilled. Generally, conflicts arise from mismatches between power, organizational
demands and feelings of personal worth.

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 & Scudder, p. 50)



In short
One must be
Awareness of the situation then
Realization Manifestation of conflict then
Resolution or suppression of conflict then
Must calculate the after-effects of the conflict situation

Melissa Taylor's 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 Psenicka's 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 manager 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)
In short to deal conflict
One must ready to FIGHT or to NEGOTIATE term to SOLVE THE PROBLEM if not
DESIGN way to put out it.
Strategies for managing conflicts
Tosi, Rizzo, and Carroll (1986) suggested four ways of managing conflicts, namely through:
Styles. Conflict handling behaviour styles (such as competition, collaboration, compromise, avoidance
or accommodation) may be suitably encouraged, depending upon the situation.
improving organizational practices. After identifying the reason for the conflict situation,
suitable organizational practices can be used to resolve conflicts, including:
- establishing superordinate goals,
- reducing vagueness,
- minimizing authority- and domain-related disputes,
- improving policies, procedures and rules,
- re-apportioning existing resources or adding new,
- altering communications,
- movement of personnel, and
- changing reward systems.
Special roles and structure. A manager has to
- Initiate structural changes needed, including re-location or merging of specialized units,
- shoulder liaison functions, and
- act as an integrator to resolve conflicts.
A person with problem-solving skills and respected by the conflicting parties can be designated
to de-fuse conflicts.
Confrontation techniques. Confrontation techniques aim at finding a mutually acceptable and enduring
solution through collaboration and compromise. It is done in the hope that conflicting parties are ready
to face each other amicably, and entails intercession, bargaining, negotiation, mediation, attribution and
application of the integrative decision method, which is a collaborative style based on the premise that
there is a solution which can be accepted by both parties. It involves a process of defining the problem,
searching for alternatives and their evaluation, and deciding by consensus.
Conflict-resolution behaviour
Depending on their intentions in a given situation, the behaviour of conflicting parties can range
from full cooperation to complete confrontation. Two intentions determining the type of conflict-
handling behaviour are assertion and cooperation: assertion refers to an attempt to confront the
other party; and cooperation refers to an attempt to find an agreeable solution.
Depending upon the degree of each intention involved, there can be five types of conflict
handling behaviour (Thomas and Kilman, 1976). They are:
Competition is a win-or-lose style of handling conflicts. It is asserting one's one viewpoint at the
potential expense of another. Competing or forcing has high concern for personal goals and low concern
for relationships. It is appropriate in dealing with conflicts which have no disagreements. It is also useful
when unpopular but necessary decisions are to be made.
Collaboration aims at finding some solution that can satisfy the conflicting parties. It is based
on a willingness to accept as valid the interests of the other party whilst protecting one's own
interests. Disagreement is addressed openly and alternatives are discussed to arrive at the best
solution. This method therefore involves high cooperation and low confrontation. Collaboration
is applicable when both parties desire to solve the problem and are willing to work together
toward a mutually acceptable solution. Collaboration is the best method of handling conflicts, as
it strives to satisfy the needs of both parties. It is integrative and has high concern for personal
goals as well as relationship.
Compromise is a common way of dealing with conflicts, particularly when the conflicting
parties have relatively equal power and mutually independent goals. It is based on the belief that
a middle route should be found to resolve the conflict situation, with concern for personal goals
as well as relationships. In the process of compromise, there are gains and losses for each
conflicting party.
Avoidance is based on the belief that conflict is evil, unwanted or boorish. It should be delayed
or ignored. Avoidance strategy has low cooperation and low confrontation. It is useful either
when conflicts are insignificant or when the other party is unyielding because of rigid attitudes.
By avoiding direct confrontation, parties in conflict get time to cool down.
Accommodation involves high cooperation and low confrontation. It plays down differences
and stresses commonalities. Accommodating can be a good strategy when one party accepts that
it is wrong and has a lot to lose and little to gain. Consequently, they are willing to accommodate
the wishes of the other party.
Let me tell you with animal icon to get picture of their nature in work/business relationship &
family/personal relationship if you follow the above technique.
Collaborating
I win, you win
Symbol: Owl
Fundamental premise: Teamwork and cooperation help everyone achieve
their goals while also maintaining relationships
Strategic philosophy: The process of working through differences will
lead to creative solutions that will satisfy both parties' concerns
When to use:
When there is a high level of trust
When you don't want to have full responsibility
When you want others to also have "ownership" of solutions
When the people involved are willing to change their thinking as
more information is found and new options are suggested
When you need to work through animosity and hard feelings
Drawbacks:
The process takes lots of time and energy
Some may take advantage of other people's trust and openness
Compromising
You bend, I bend
Symbol: Fox
Fundamental premise: Winning something while losing a little is OK
Strategic philosophy: Both ends are placed against the middle in an
attempt to serve the "common good" while ensuring each person can
maintain something of their original position
When to use:
When people of equal status are equally committed to goals
When time can be saved by reaching intermediate settlements on
individual parts of complex issues
When goals are moderately important
Drawbacks:
Important values and long-term objectives can be derailed in the
process
May not work if initial demands are too great
Can spawn cynicism, especially if there's no commitment to honor
the compromise solutions
Accommodating
I lose, you win
Symbol: Teddy Bear
Fundamental premise: Working toward a common purpose is more
important than any of the peripheral concerns; the trauma of confronting
differences may damage fragile relationships
Strategic philosophy: Appease others by downplaying conflict, thus
protecting the relationship
When to use:
When an issue is not as important to you as it is to the other person
When you realize you are wrong
When you are willing to let others learn by mistake
When you know you cannot win
When it is not the right time and you would prefer to simply build
credit for the future
When harmony is extremely important
When what the parties have in common is a good deal more
important than their differences
Drawbacks:
One's own ideas don't get attention
Credibility and influence can be lost
Competing
I win, you lose
Symbol: Shark
Fundamental premise: Associates "winning" a conflict with competition
Strategic philosophy: When goals are extremely important, one must
sometimes use power to win
When to use:
When you know you are right
When time is short and a quick decision is needed
When a strong personality is trying to steamroller you and you
don't want to be taken advantage of
When you need to stand up for your rights
Drawbacks:
Can escalate conflict
Losers may retaliate
Avoiding
No winners, no losers
Symbol: Turtle
Fundamental premise: This isn't the right time or place to address this
issue
Strategic philosophy: Avoids conflict by withdrawing, sidestepping, or
postponing
When to use:
When the conflict is small and relationships are at stake
When you're counting to ten to cool off
When more important issues are pressing and you feel you don't
have time to deal with this particular one
When you have no power and you see no chance of getting your
concerns met
When you are too emotionally involved and others around you can
solve the conflict more successfully
When more information is needed
Drawbacks:
Important decisions may be made by default
Postponing may make matters worse
Conflicts are inevitable in any organization. A modest level of conflict can be useful in
generating better ideas and methods, inspiring concern and ingenuity, and stimulating the
emergence of long-suppressed problems.
Conflict management strategies should aim at keeping conflict at a level at which different ideas
and viewpoints are fully voiced but unproductive conflicts are deterred. Stimulation of conflict
situations is appropriate if the research manager identifies conditions of 'group-think.' Group-
think is a situation where conflict rarely occurs because of high group cohesion, which results in
poor decision and inadequate performance. Group-think prevails when there are lot of 'yes men'
in a group, with the result that there is no serious appraisal of the situation and new ideas are not
suggested. Group members attach greater importance to popularity, tranquility and peace in the
group rather than to technical ability and proficiency. Members are disinclined to verbalize their
unbiased views in order to avoid hurting the feelings of other members of the group. Decisions
are accepted as they are, adversely affecting organizational productivity. A manager can choose
several remedies to avoid group-think (Irving, 1971).
A conflict situation can be induced by supporting individualistic thinking or favoring individual
competition. Individualistic thinking can be initiated in the group by including some group
members who can freely express their views, which can encourage and prod others to do the
same. Competition between individuals can be enhanced by acknowledging and rewarding the
better performers. Conflict situations can also be introduced by making some organizational
changes, such as transferring some group members, redefining roles, and helping the emergence
of new leadership. A manager can also create a conflict situation by delivering shocks, such as
by reducing some existing perks of the members of the organization. After stimulating the
conflict situation, a manager should:
identify the likely source of the conflict situation,
calibrate the productiveness of the situation, and
neutralize the unproductive conflict situation.
Basic problems in inter-group behavior are conflict of goals and communication failures, A basic
tactic in resolving conflicts, therefore, is to find goals upon which scientists or groups can agree,
and to ensure proper communication and interaction. Some conflicts arise because of simple
misconceptions, which can be overcome by improved communication.
A manager should manage conflicts effectively rather than suppress or avoid them. To manage
them, a manager needs to ask 'What?' and 'Why?' - And not 'Who?' - To get at the root of a
problem. In the process of resolving conflicts, many problems can be identified and solved by
removing obstacles and creating a new environment of individual growth. If conflicts are not
managed properly, they can be damaging, as they waste a lot of energy and time, and invoke
tension, which reduces the productivity and creativity of those involved.
Conflict is a concept familiar to most of us. Hence, we are aware of the consequences that it can
cause if it is mishandled. Thus, knowing how to go around a conflict by efficiently implementing
conflict management is important for it to be resolved. Keep in mind that with the resolution of
conflict comes an opportunity for growth, may it be personally or professionally.
In nutshell thinking the part of solution and not being part problem would help yourself, your
organization and your personal relationship to higher, better, stronger and progressive growth
By
A.T. Sunder Shivah