Conflict and Negotiation: Learning Objectives

Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Fourteen
CONFLICT AND NEGOTIATION

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Define conflict.
2. Differentiate between the traditional, human relations, and interactionist views of conflict.
3. Contrast task, relationship, and process conflict.
4. Outline the conflict process.
5. Describe the five conflict-handling intentions.
6. Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
7. Identify the five steps in the negotiation process.
8. Describe cultural differences in negotiations.
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
Many people automatically assume that conflict is related to lower group and organizational performance.
This chapter has demonstrated that this assumption is frequently incorrect. Conflict can be either constructive or
destructive to the functioning of a group or unit. As shown in Exhibit 14-8, levels of conflict can be either too high
or too low. Either extreme hinders performance. An optimal level is where there is enough conflict to prevent
stagnation, stimulate creativity, allow tensions to be released, and initiate the seeds for change, yet not so much
as to be disruptive or deter coordination of activities.
Inadequate or excessive levels of conflict can hinder the effectiveness of a group or an organization,
resulting in reduced satisfaction of group members, increased absence and turnover rates, and, eventually, lower
productivity. On the other hand, when conflict is at an optimal level, complacency and apathy should be
minimized, motivation should be enhanced through the creation of a challenging and questioning environment
with a vitality that makes work interesting, and there should be the amount of turnover needed to rid the
organization of misfits and poor performers.
What advice can we give managers faced with excessive conflict and the need to reduce it? Do not assume
there is one conflict-handling intention that will always be best! You should select an intention appropriate for the
situation. The following provides some guidelines:
• Use competition when quick, decisive action is vital (in emergencies); on important issues, where unpopular
actions need implementing (in cost cutting, enforcing unpopular rules, discipline); on issues vital to the
organization’s welfare when you know you are right; and against people who take advantage of
noncompetitive behavior.
• Use collaboration to find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important to be
compromised; when your objective is to learn; to merge insights from people with different perspectives; to
gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus; and to work through feelings that have
interfered with a relationship.
• Use avoidance when an issue is trivial, or more important issues are pressing; when you perceive no chance
of satisfying your concerns; when potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution; to let people cool
down and regain perspective; when gathering information supersedes immediate decision; when others can
resolve the conflict more effectively; and when issues seem tangential or symptomatic of other issues.
• Use accommodation when you find you are wrong and to allow a better position to be heard, to learn, and to
show your reasonableness; when issues are more important to others than yourself and to satisfy others and
maintain cooperation; to build social credits for later issues; to minimize loss when you are outmatched and
losing; when harmony and stability are especially important; and to allow employees to develop by learning
from mistakes.
• Use compromise when goals are important but not worth the effort of potential disruption of more assertive
approaches; when opponents with equal power are committed to mutually exclusive goals; to achieve
temporary settlements to complex issues; to arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure; and as a
backup when collaboration or competition is unsuccessful.
Negotiation was shown to be an ongoing activity in groups and organizations. Distributive bargaining can
resolve disputes but it often negatively affects one or more negotiators’ satisfaction because it is focused on the
short term and because it is confrontational. Integrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to provide outcomes that
satisfy all parties and that build lasting relationships.
39
WEB EXERCISES
At the end of each chapter of this instructor’s manual, you will find suggested exercises and ideas for researching
the WWW on OB topics. The exercises “Exploring OB Topics on the Web” are set up so that you can simply
photocopy the pages, distribute them to your class, and make assignments accordingly. You may want to assign
the exercises as an out-of-class activity or as lab activities with your class. Within the lecture notes the graphic
will note that there is a WWW activity to support this material.
The chapter opens introducing Viacom’s President and COO, Mel Karmazin and CEO, Sumner Redstone. Both
men are responsible for the management activities of Viacom and have experienced conflict as a result. The
Board of Directors has ordered them to “patch things up.” Redstone would again like to be the sole manager of
Viacome (he currently owns 68 percent of the stock) and he dislikes Karmazin’s aggressive management style.
Karmazin has said he would leave at the end of his contract in 2003 and is said to be the better manager of the
two. It is predicted that the stock price will drop should Karmazin leave.
CHAPTER NOTES
A Definition of Conflict Notes:
1. There are several common themes which underlie most definitions:

• The parties to it must perceive conflict.
• Commonalties in the definitions are opposition or incompatibility and some
form of interaction.
2. We define conflict as “a process that begins when one party perceives that
another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect,
something that the first party cares about.”
• This describes that point when an interaction “crosses over” to become an
inter-party conflict.
• It encompasses the wide range of conflicts that people experience in
organizations.
Transitions in Conflict Thought Notes:
1. The traditional view of conflict argues that it must be avoided—it indicates a

malfunctioning with the group.
2. The human relations view argues that conflict is a natural and inevitable
outcome in any group and that it need not be evil, but has the potential to be a
positive force in determining group performance.
3. The inter-actionist approach proposes that conflict can be a positive force in a
group but explicitly argues that some conflict is absolutely necessary for a
group to perform effectively.
40
A. The Traditional View Notes:
5. This early approach assumed that all conflict was bad. Conflict was
synonymous with such terms that reinforced its negative connotation. By
definition, it was harmful and was to be avoided.
6. This view was consistent with the prevailing attitudes about group behavior in
the 1930s and 1940s. Conflict was seen as a dysfunctional outcome resulting
from poor communication, a lack of openness and trust between people, and
the failure of managers to be responsive to their employees.
B. The Human Relations View
1. Conflict is a natural occurrence in all groups and organizations. Since it was

natural and inevitable it should be accepted.
2. It cannot be eliminated and may even contribute to group performance.
3. The human relations view dominated conflict theory from the late 1940s
through the mid-1970s.
C. The Inter-actionist View
1. The inter-actionist view is the one taken in this chapter.

2. This approach encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious, peaceful,
tranquil, and cooperative group is prone to becoming static and non-responsive
to needs for change and innovation.
3. Group leaders maintain enough conflict to keep the group viable, self-critical,
and creative.
4. Whether a conflict is good or bad depends on the type of conflict.
Functional vs. Dysfunctional Conflict Notes:
1. Not all conflicts are good. Functional, constructive forms of conflict support the
goals of the group and improve its performance. Conflicts that hinder group
performance are dysfunctional or destructive forms of conflict.
2. What differentiates functional from dysfunctional conflict? You need to look at
the type of conflict.
• Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. Low-to-moderate
levels of task conflict are functional and consistently demonstrate a
positive effect on group performance because it stimulates discussion,
improving group performance.
• Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships.
a. These conflicts are almost always dysfunctional.
b. The friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent in relationship
conflicts increase personality clashes and decrease mutual
understanding.
• Process conflict relates to how the work gets done.
a. Low-levels of process conflict are functional and could enhance team
performance.
b. For process conflict to be productive, it must be kept low.
c. Intense arguments create uncertainty.
41
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the OB IN THE NEWS – Yahoo! Inc.:
Suffering from an Absence of Conflict found in the text and below. A suggestion for a class exercise follows.
OB IN THE NEWS -- Yahoo! Inc.: Suffering from an Absence of Conflict
The company might well have been the “poster child” for the new-economy firm. Begun in 1994, Yahoo! is
a clever service for searching the World Wide Web. By 1999, it had become one of the best known brand names
on the Internet and was used by 185 million people worldwide. The company’s market value had rocketed to an
eye-popping $134 billion.
The implosion of dot.com stocks and the subsequent economic recession hit Yahoo! hard. By the spring
of 2001, the stock was down 92 percent from its peak and advertising sales were plunging. The company still had
a valuable brand name, easy-to-use and high-quality services, and a record of profitability. Yet the company’s
most critical problem was now exposed for everyone to see: Yahoo! was too insulated and void of functional
conflict.
Yahoo! suffered from having managers and staff who were too comfortable with each other. It is a tone
that had been directly set at the top by the company’s CEO, Tim Koogle. Yahoo!’s corporate mentality was one of
nonconfrontation. This kept new ideas from percolating upward and held dissent to a minimum. It began with the
company’s inbred board—made up of a small group of insiders and friends of insiders. There was no one on the
board with the courage or perspective to challenge company practices. This intense closeness by insiders also
made it hard for the company to attract or retain experienced managers. Many left when they were unable to
penetrate the company’s inner sanctum. Yahoo!’s top European and Asian executives and many middle
managers also left, amid complaints that the top team would not delegate authority.
The company is “very insular,” says a former executive. “They see the world through the Yahoo! lens.”
This insularity also carries over into an arrogant attitude of “we know better than anyone else.” Over the years, its
Yahoo!-way-or the-highway approach stifled new ideas and frustrated talented people who were outside the
power core.
Yahoo! took the first step toward changing its conflict-free climate in March 2001 when it announced it
would launch a search for a new chief executive to replace Koogle.
Source: Based on K. Swisher, “Yahoo! May Be Down, But Don’t Count It Out,” Wall Street Journal, March 9, 2001, p. B1; and M. Mangalindan
and S. L. Hwang, “Coterie of Early Hires Made Yahoo! A Hit but an Insular Place,” Wall Street Journal, March 9, 2001, p. A1.
Class Exercise: Discuss with students (as a class or in groups) the following:
1. Was the conflict (or lack of it) functional or dysfunctional? Why?

2. What were the values of Yahoo and Koogle in regards to conflict?
3. Would Yahoo have been a place you would want to have worked under those circumstances? Why?
4. What could have been done at Yahoo so that Koogle would not have had to go?
5. What conflicts have you been involved with at work and what were the causes?
6. What could you have done to resolve task conflicts you have experienced?
7. What could you have done to resolve relationship conflict you have experienced?
The Conflict Process
A. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility Notes:
First is the presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise.
Three general categories: communication, structure, and personal variables
1. Communication
• Communication as a source of conflict represents those opposing forces
that arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise” in the
communication channels.
• Differing word connotations, jargon, insufficient exchange of information,
and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to communication
and potential antecedents to conflict.
42
A. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility (cont.) Notes:
• Semantic difficulties are a result of differences in training, selective

perception, and inadequate information.
• The potential for conflict increases when either too little or too much
communication takes place.
• The channel chosen for communicating can have an influence on

stimulating opposition.
2. Structure
• The term structure includes variables such as size, degree of
specialization, jurisdictional clarity, member-goal compatibility, leadership
styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence.
• Size and specialization act as forces to stimulate conflict. The larger the
group and more specialized its activities, the greater the likelihood of
conflict.
• The potential for conflict is greatest where group members are younger
and turnover is high.
• The greater the ambiguity in responsibility for actions lies, the greater the
potential for conflict.
• The diversity of goals among groups is a major source of conflict.
• A close style of leadership increases conflict potential.
• Too much reliance on participation may also stimulate conflict.
• Reward systems, too, are found to create conflict when one member’s gain
is at another’s expense.
• Finally, if a group is dependent on another group, opposing forces are
stimulated.
3. Personal variables
• Include individual value systems and personality characteristics. Certain
personality types lead to potential conflict.
• Most important is differing value systems. Value differences are the best
explanation for differences of opinion on various matters.
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the MYTH OR SCIENCE – “The Source of
Most Conflicts Is Lack of Communication” found in the text and below. A suggestion for a class exercise follows.
43
MYTH OR SCIENCE – “The Source of Most Conflicts Is Lack of Communication”
A popular myth in organizations is that poor communication is the primary source of conflicts. A review of
the literature suggests that within organizations, structural factors and individual value differences are probably
greater sources of conflict.
Conflicts in organizations are frequently structurally derived—conflicts between people in sales and credit
are typically due to their different departmental goals. When people have to work together but are pursuing
diverse goals, conflicts occur. Similarly, increased organizational size, routinization, work specialization, and zero-
sum reward systems are all examples of structural factors that can lead to conflicts.
Many conflicts, which are attributed to poor communication, are due to value differences. When managers
treat a value-based conflict as a communication problem, the conflict is often increased. Lack of communication
can be a source of conflict, but managers should first look to structural or value-based explanations since they are
more prevalent in organizations.
Class Exercise:
1. Consider using the team exercise at this point or referencing this material when you process the exercise.
2. At that time, have students discuss what part the lack of communication had in fostering the conflict or how
communicating minimized and/or resolved the conflict.
B. Stage II: Cognition and Personalization Notes:
1. Antecedent conditions lead to conflict only when the parties are affected by and
aware of it.
2. Conflict is personalized when it is felt and when individuals become emotionally
involved.
3. This stage is where conflict issues tend to be defined and this definition
delineates the possible settlements.
4. Second, emotions play a major role in shaping perceptions.
• Negative emotions produce oversimplification of issues, reductions in trust,
and negative interpretations of the other party’s behavior.
• Positive feelings increase the tendency to see potential relationships
among the elements of a problem, to take a broader view of the situation,
and to develop more innovative solutions.
C. Stage III: Intentions
1. Intentions are decisions to act in a given way.

2. Why are intentions separated out as a distinct stage? Merely one party
attributing the wrong intentions to the other escalates a lot of conflicts.
3. One author’s effort to identify the primary conflict-handling intentions is
represented in Exhibit 14-2 is along two dimensions:
• Cooperativeness—“the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the
other party’s concerns.”
• Assertiveness—“the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy his or
her own concerns.”
44
C. Stage III: Intentions (cont.) Notes:
4. Five conflict-handling intentions can be identified.

• Competing: When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests,
regardless of the impact on the other parties to the conflict
• Collaborating: When the parties to conflict each desire to fully satisfy the
concerns of all parties. The intention is to solve the problem by clarifying
differences rather than by accommodating.
• Avoiding: A person may recognize that a conflict exists and want to
withdraw from it or suppress it.
• Accommodating: When one party seeks to appease an opponent, that
party is willing to be self-sacrificing.
• Compromising: When each party to the conflict seeks to give up
something, sharing occurs, resulting in a compromised outcome. There is
no clear winner or loser, and the solution provides incomplete satisfaction
of both parties’ concerns.
5. Intentions provide general guidelines for parties in a conflict situation. They
define each party’s purpose, but they are not fixed.
• They might change because of reconceptualization or because of an
emotional reaction.
• However, individuals have preferences among the five conflict-handling
intentions.
• It may be more appropriate to view the five conflict-handling intentions as
relatively fixed rather than as a set of options from which individuals
choose to fit an appropriate situation.
D. Stage IV: Behavior
1. Stage IV is where conflicts become visible. The behavior stage includes the
statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties. These
conflict behaviors are usually overt attempts to implement each party’s
intentions.
2. Stage IV is a dynamic process of interaction; conflicts exist somewhere along a
continuum (See Exhibit 14-4).
• At the lower part of the continuum, conflicts are characterized by subtle,
indirect, and highly controlled forms of tension.
• Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum
until they become highly destructive.
• Functional conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the
continuum.
3. Exhibit 14-4 lists the major resolution and stimulation techniques.
45
E. Stage V: Outcomes Notes:
1. Outcomes may be functional—improving group performance, or dysfunctional

in hindering it.
2. Functional outcomes
• How might conflict act as a force to increase group performance?
• Conflict is constructive when it:
a. Improves the quality of decisions.
b. Stimulates creativity and innovation.
c. Encourages interest and curiosity.
d. Provides the medium through which problems can be aired and
tensions released.
e. Fosters an environment of self-evaluation and change.
• The evidence suggests that conflict can improve the quality of decision-
making.
• Conflict is an antidote for groupthink.
• Conflict challenges the status quo, furthers the creation of new ideas,
promotes reassessment of group goals and activities, and increases the
probability that the group will respond to change.
• Research studies in diverse settings confirm the functionality of conflict.
a. The comparison of six major decisions made during the administration
of four different US presidents found that conflict reduced the chance
of groupthink.
b. When groups analyzed decisions that had been made by the individual
members of that group, the average improvement among the high-
conflict groups was 73 percent greater than was that of those groups
characterized by low-conflict conditions.
• Increasing cultural diversity of the workforce should provide benefits to
organizations.
a. Heterogeneity among group and organization members can increase
creativity, improve the quality of decisions, and facilitate change by
enhancing member flexibility.
b. The ethnically diverse groups produced more effective and more
feasible ideas and higher quality, unique ideas than those produced by
the all-Anglo group.
• Similarly, studies of professionals—systems analysts and research and
development scientists—support the constructive value of conflict.
a. An investigation of 22 teams of systems analysts found that the more
incompatible groups were likely to be more productive.
E. Research and development scientists have been found to be most
productive where there is a certain amount of intellectual conflict.
46
E. Stage V: Outcomes (cont.) Notes:
3. Dysfunctional outcomes
• Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common
ties and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.
• Undesirable consequences:
a. A retarding of communication
b. Reductions in group cohesiveness
c. Subordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting between
members
• Conflict can bring group functioning to a halt and potentially threaten the
group’s survival.
• The demise of an organization as a result of too much conflict is not as
unusual as it might first appear. One of New York’s best-known law firms,
Shea & Gould, closed down solely because the 80 partners just could not
get along.
4. Creating functional conflict

• If managers accept the inter-actionist view toward conflict, they encourage
functional conflict.
5. Creating functional conflict is a tough job, particularly in large American
corporations.
• A high proportion of people who get to the top are conflict avoiders.
• At least seven out of ten people in American business hush up when their
opinions are at odds with those of their superiors, allowing bosses to make
mistakes even when they know better.
• Such anti-conflict cultures are not tolerable in today’s fiercely competitive
global economy.
6. This process frequently results in decisions and alternatives that previously had
not been considered.
• One common ingredient in organizations that successfully create functional
conflict is that they reward dissent and punish conflict avoiders.
• The real challenge for managers is when they hear news that they do not
want to hear.
• Managers should ask calm, even-tempered questions: “Can you tell me
more about what happened?,” “What do you think we ought to do?,” and
offer a sincere “Thank you.”
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the POINT – COUNTER POINT – Conflict
Benefits Organizations found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes. A suggestion for a class exercise
follows.
OR
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the CASE INCIDENT – Working at
ThinkLink found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes. A suggestion for a class exercise follows.
47
F. Negotiation Notes:
1. Negotiation is a “process in which two or more parties exchange goods or

services and attempt to agree upon the exchange rate for them.” We use the
terms negotiation and bargaining interchangeably.
2. Negotiation permeates the interactions of almost everyone in groups and
organizations. For example, labor bargains with management.
3. Not so obvious, however,
• Managers negotiate with employees, peers, and bosses.
• Salespeople negotiate with customers.
• Purchasing agents negotiate with suppliers.
• A worker agrees to answer a colleague’s phone for a few minutes in
exchange for some past or future benefit.
G. Bargaining Strategies
1. There are two general approaches to negotiation: distributive bargaining and

integrative bargaining. (See Exhibit 14-5)
2. Distributive bargaining
• An example of distributive bargaining is buying a car:
a. You go out to see the car. It is great and you want it.
b. The owner tells you the asking price. You do not want to pay that
much.
c. The two of you then negotiate over the price.
• Its most identifying feature is that it operates under zero-sum conditions.
Any gain I make is at your expense, and vice versa.
• The most widely cited example of distributive bargaining is in labor-
management negotiations over wages.
• The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 14-6.
a. Parties A and B represent two negotiators.
b. Each has a target point that defines what he or she would like to
achieve.
c. Each also has a resistance point, which marks the lowest outcome that
is acceptable.
d. The area between these two points makes up each one’s aspiration
range.
F. As long as there is some overlap between A and B’s aspiration ranges,
there exists a settlement range where each one’s aspirations can be met.
• When engaged in distributive bargaining, one’s tactics focus on trying to
get one’s opponent to agree to one’s specific target point or to get as close
to it as possible.
48
G. Bargaining Strategies (cont.) Notes:
3. Integrative bargaining
• An example: A sales rep calls in the order and is told that the firm cannot
approve credit to this customer because of a past slow-pay record.
a. The next day, the sales rep and the firm’s credit manager meet to
discuss the problem. They want to make the sale, but do not want to
get stuck with uncollectable debt.
b. The two openly review their options.
c. After considerable discussion, they agree on a solution that meets both
their needs. The sale will go through with a bank guarantee that will
ensure payment if not made in 60 days.
• This example operates under the assumption that there exists one or more
settlements that can create a win-win solution.
• In terms of intra-organizational behavior, all things being equal, integrative
bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining.
• Because integrative bargaining builds long-term relationships and
facilitates working together in the future, it bonds negotiators and allows
each to leave the bargaining table feeling victorious.
• Distributive bargaining, on the other hand, leaves one party a loser. It
tends to build animosities and deepens divisions.
• Why do we not see more integrative bargaining in organizations? The
answer lies in the conditions necessary for this type of negotiation to
succeed.
a. Parties who are open with information and candid about their concerns
b. A sensitivity by both parties to the other’s needs
c. The ability to trust one another
d. A willingness by both parties to maintain flexibility
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the ETHICAL DILEMMA – Is It Unethical
to Lie and Deceive During Negotiations found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes. A suggestion for
a class exercise follows.
H. The Negotiation Process Notes:
1. A simplified model of the negotiation process is provided in Exhibit 14-7.

2. Preparation and planning:
• Do your homework. What is the nature of the conflict? What is the history
leading up to this negotiation? Who is involved, and what are their
perceptions of the conflict? What do you want from the negotiation? What
are your goals?
• You also want to prepare an assessment of what you think the other party
to your negotiation’s goals are.
a. When you can anticipate your opponent’s position, you are better
equipped to counter his or her arguments with the facts and figures
that support your position.
49
H. The Negotiation Process (cont.) Notes:
• Once you have gathered your information, use it to develop a strategy.

• Determine your and the other side’s Best Alternative To a Negotiated
Agreement (BATNA).
a. Your BATNA determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a
negotiated agreement.
b. Any offer you receive that is higher than your BATNA is better
than an impasse.
3. Definition of ground rules:
• Who will do the negotiating? Where will it take place? What time
constraints, if any, will apply?
• To what issues will negotiation be limited? Will there be a specific
procedure to follow if an impasse is reached?
• During this phase, the parties will also exchange their initial proposals or
demands.
4. Clarification and justification:
• When initial positions have been exchanged, explain, amplify, clarify,
bolster, and justify your original demands
• This need not be confrontational.
• You might want to provide the other party with any documentation that
helps support your position.
5. Bargaining and problem solving:

• The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give and take in trying
to hash out an agreement.
• Concessions will undoubtedly need to be made by both parties.
6. Closure and implementation:
• The final step—formalizing the agreement that has been worked out and
developing any procedures that are necessary for implementation and
monitoring
• Major negotiations will require hammering out the specifics in a formal
contract.
• For most cases, however, closure of the negotiation process is nothing
more formal than a handshake.
I. Issues in Negotiation
1. The role of personality traits in negotiation

• Can you predict an opponent’s negotiating tactics if you know something
about his/her personality? The evidence says no.
• Overall assessments of the personality-negotiation relationship finds that
personality traits have no significant direct effect on either the bargaining
process or negotiation outcomes.
50
51
I. Issues in Negotiation (cont.) Notes:
2. Gender differences in negotiations

• Men and women do not negotiate differently.
• A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative, pleasant, and
relationship-oriented in negotiations than are men. The evidence does not
support this.
• Comparisons between experienced male and female managers find
women are:
a. Neither worse nor better negotiators.
b. Neither more cooperative nor open to the other.
c. Neither more nor less persuasive nor threatening than are
men.
• The belief that women are “nicer” is probably due to confusing gender and
the lack of power typically held by women.
a. Low-power managers, regardless of gender, attempt to placate their
opponents and to use softly persuasive tactics rather than direct
confrontation and threats.
• Women’s attitudes toward negotiation and toward themselves appear to be
different from men’s.
a. Managerial women demonstrate less confidence in anticipation of
negotiating and are less satisfied with their performance despite
achieving similar outcomes as men.
b. Women may unduly penalize themselves by failing to engage in
negotiations when such action would be in their best interests.
3. Cultural differences in negotiations
• Negotiating styles clearly vary across national cultures.
• The French like conflict.
a. They gain recognition and develop their reputations by thinking and
acting against others.
b. They tend to take a long time in negotiating agreements, and they are
not overly concerned about whether their opponents like or dislike
them.
• The Chinese also draw out negotiations but that is because they believe
negotiations never end.
a. Just when you think you have reached a final solution, the Chinese
executive might smile and start the process all over again.
b. Like the Japanese, the Chinese negotiate to develop a relationship and
a commitment to work together.
• Americans are known around the world for their impatience and their
desire to be liked.
a. Astute negotiators often turn these characteristics to their advantage.
4. The cultural context of the negotiation significantly influences the amount and
type of preparation for bargaining, the emphasis on task versus interpersonal
relationships, the tactics used, etc.
5. A study compared North Americans, Arabs, and Russians negotiating style,
how they responded to an opponent’s arguments, their approach to making
concessions, and how they handled negotiating deadlines.
52
53
• North Americans tried to persuade others by relying on facts and appealing

to logic.
a. They made small concessions early in the negotiation to establish a
relationship and usually reciprocated the opponent’s concessions.
b. North Americans treated deadlines as very important.
• The Arabs tried to persuade by appealing to emotion.
a. They countered opponent’s arguments with subjective feelings.
b. They made concessions throughout the bargaining process and almost
always reciprocated opponents’ concessions.
c. Arabs approached deadlines very casually.
• The Russians based their arguments on asserted ideals.
a. They made few, if any, concessions.
b. Any concession offered by an opponent was viewed as a weakness
and almost never reciprocated.
c. Finally, the Russians tended to ignore deadlines.
3. A second study looked at verbal and nonverbal negotiation tactics exhibited by
North Americans, Japanese, and Brazilians during half-hour bargaining
sessions.
• Brazilians on average said “No” 83 times compared to five times for the
Japanese and nine times for the North Americans.
• The Japanese displayed more than five periods of silence lasting longer
than ten seconds during the 30-minute sessions.
• North Americans averaged 3.5 such periods; the Brazilians had none.
• The Japanese and North Americans interrupted their opponent about the
same number of times, but the Brazilians interrupted 2.5 to 3 times more
often.
• Finally, while the Japanese and the North Americans had no physical
contact with their opponents during negotiations except for handshaking,
the Brazilians touched each other almost five times every half-hour.
7. Third-party negotiations
• When individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate and are
unable to resolve their differences through direct negotiations, they may
turn to a third party.
• A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by
using reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the like.
a. They are widely used in labor-management negotiations and in civil
court disputes.
b. Their settlement rate is approximately 60 percent, with negotiator
satisfaction at about 75 percent.
c. The key to success—the conflicting parties must be motivated to
bargain and resolve their conflict, intensity cannot be too high, and the
mediator must be perceived as neutral and noncoercive.
54
• An arbitrator is “a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.”

a. It can be voluntary (requested) or compulsory (forced on the parties by
law or contract).
b. The authority of the arbitrator varies according to the rules set by the
negotiators.
c. The arbitrator might be limited to choosing one of the negotiator’s last
offers or to suggesting an agreement point that is nonbinding, or free
to choose and make any judgment.
d. The big plus of arbitration over mediation is that it always results in a
settlement.
e. Any negative depends on how “heavy-handed” the arbitrator appears.
• A conciliator is “a trusted third party who provides an informal
communication link among parties.”
a. This role was made famous by Robert Duval in the first Godfather film.
b. Conciliation is used extensively in international, labor, family, and
community disputes.
c. Comparing its effectiveness to mediation has proven difficult.
d. Conciliators engage in fact finding, interpreting messages, and
persuading disputants to develop agreements.
• A consultant is “a skilled and impartial third party who attempts to facilitate
problem solving through communication and analysis, aided by his or her
knowledge of conflict management.”
a. In contrast to the previous roles, the consultant’s role is to improve
relations between the conflicting parties so that they can reach a
settlement themselves.
b. This approach has a longer-term focus: to build new and positive
perceptions and attitudes between the conflicting parties.
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the TEAM EXERCISE – A Negotiation
Role Play found in the text and at the end of the these chapter notes.
55
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW
1. What are the disadvantages to conflict? What are its advantages?

Answer – Conflict can injure feelings, delay the work process, result in factions developing, etc. Conflict,
however, can stimulate opinions, raise more and better ideas, air any problems or interpersonal conflicts so
that they can be resolved, etc.
2. What is the difference between functional and dysfunctional conflict? What determines functionality?
Answer – Functional—constructive forms of conflict support the goals of the group and improve its
performance. Conflicts that hinder group performance are dysfunctional or destructive forms of conflict.
Dysfunctional conflict depends on the type of conflict.
Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work.
• Low-to-moderate levels of task conflict are functional and consistently demonstrate a positive
effect on group performance because it stimulates discussion of ideas that help groups perform better.
Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships.
• These conflicts are almost always dysfunctional.
• The friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent in relationship conflicts increase personality
clashes and decrease mutual understanding, which hinders the completion of organizational tasks.
Process conflict relates to how the work gets done.
• Low-levels of process conflict are functional and could enhance team performance.
• For process conflict to be productive, it must be kept low.
• Intense arguments create uncertainty.
3. Under what conditions might conflict be beneficial to a group?

Answer – The conditions differ according to the type of conflict. With task conflict, low-to-moderate levels of
task conflict are functional and stimulate discussion of ideas that help groups perform better. Relationship
conflict is almost always dysfunctional because it decreases mutual understanding, which hinders the
completion of organizational tasks. Process conflict is functional if kept to a low-level.
4. What are the components in the conflict process model? From your own experiences, give an example of how
a conflict proceeded through the five stages.
Answer – The process is diagrammed in Exhibit 14-1.
• Stage I: Potential opposition or incompatibility—The first step in the conflict process is the
presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise. These conditions have been
condensed into three general categories: communication, structure, and personal variables.
• Stage II: Cognition and personalization—The antecedent conditions can lead to conflict only
when one or more of the parties are affected by, and aware of, the conflict. Just because a conflict is
perceived does not mean that it is personalized. It is important because it is where conflict issues tend to
be defined.
• Stage III: Intentions—Intentions are decisions to act in a given way. Exhibit 14-2 represents one
author’s effort to identify the primary conflict-handling intentions. Two dimensions—cooperativeness and
assertiveness. Five conflict-handling intentions can be identified: competing (assertive and
uncooperative), collaborating (assertive and cooperative), avoiding (unassertive and uncooperative),
accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and compromising (midrange on both assertiveness and
cooperativeness).
• Stage IV: Behavior—The behavior stage includes the statements, actions, and reactions made by
the conflicting parties. These conflict behaviors are usually overt attempts to implement each party’s
intentions. Exhibit 14-3 provides a way of visualizing conflict behavior. Exhibit 14-4 lists the major
resolution and stimulation techniques that allow managers to control conflict levels.
• Stage V: Outcomes—Outcomes may be functional in that the conflict results in an improvement in
the group’s performance, or dysfunctional in that it hinders group performance. Conflict is constructive
when it improves the quality of decisions, stimulates creativity and innovation, etc. Dysfunctional
outcomes—uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties, and
eventually leads to the destruction of the group. Among the more undesirable consequences are a
retarding of communication, reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to the
primacy of infighting between members.
56
5. How could a manager stimulate conflict in his or her department?

Answer – If managers accept the inter-actionist view toward conflict, they encourage functional conflict.
Creating functional conflict is a tough job, particularly in large American corporations. A high proportion of
people who get to the top are conflict avoiders. At least seven out of ten people in American business hush up
when their opinions are at odds with those of their superiors, allowing bosses to make mistakes even when
they know better.
Examples of creating functional conflict:
• Hewlett-Packard rewards dissenters by recognizing go-against-the-grain types.
• Herman Miller, Inc., has a formal system in which employees evaluate and criticize their bosses.
• IBM also has a formal system that encourages dissension. Employees can question their boss
with impunity.
• Royal Dutch Shell Group, General Electric, and Anheuser-Busch build devil’s advocates into the
decision process.
6. What defines the settlement range in distributive bargaining?

Answer – The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in Exhibit 14-6. Each party’s target point or
resistance point marks the lowest outcome that is acceptable, and the area between these two points makes
up each party’s aspiration range. As long as there is some overlap between A and B’s aspiration ranges,
there exists a settlement range where each one’s aspirations can be met.
7. Why isn’t integrative bargaining more widely practiced in organizations?

Answer – In terms of intra-organizational behavior, all things being equal, integrative bargaining is preferable
to distributive bargaining, because the former builds long-term relationships and facilitates working together in
the future. It bonds negotiators and allows each to leave the bargaining table feeling that he or she has
achieved a victory. We do not see more integrative bargaining in organizations because certain conditions are
necessary for this type of negotiation to succeed.
• Parties who are open with information and candid about their concerns
• A sensitivity by both parties to the other’s needs
• The ability to trust one another
• A willingness by both parties to maintain flexibility
8. How do men and women differ, if at all, in their approaches to negotiation?

Answer – Men and women do not negotiate differently. Comparisons between experienced male and female
managers find women are neither worse nor better negotiators, neither more cooperative nor open to the
other, and neither more nor less persuasive nor threatening than are men. However, women’s attitudes
toward negotiation and toward themselves as negotiators appear to be quite different from men’s. Managerial
women demonstrate less confidence in anticipation of negotiating and are less satisfied with their
performance despite achieving similar outcomes as men. Women may unduly penalize themselves by failing
to engage in negotiations when such action would be in their best interests.
9. What problems might Americans have in negotiating with people from collectivist cultures like China and
Japan?
Answer – The Chinese also draw out negotiations but that is because they believe negotiations never end.
Just when you think you have reached a final solution, the Chinese executive might smile and start the
process all over again. Like the Japanese, the Chinese negotiate to develop a relationship and a commitment
to work together. Americans are known around the world for their impatience and their desire to be liked.
Astute negotiators often turn these characteristics to their advantage. North Americans tried to persuade by
relying on facts and appealing to logic. They made small concessions early in the negotiation to establish a
relationship, and usually reciprocated opponent’s concessions. North Americans treated deadlines as very
important.
Another study looked at verbal and nonverbal negotiation tactics exhibited by North Americans and Japanese.
Japanese on average said “No” five times for the nine times the North Americans did. The Japanese
displayed more than five periods of silence lasting longer than ten seconds during the 30-minute sessions.
North Americans averaged 3.5 such periods. The Japanese and North Americans interrupted their opponent
about the same number of times. Finally, the Japanese and the North Americans had no physical contact with
their opponents during negotiations except for handshaking.
57
10. What can you do to improve your negotiating effectiveness?

Answer – Take the time to assess your own goals, consider the other party’s goals and interests, and develop
a strategy, then try the following:
• Begin with a positive overture. Concessions tend to be reciprocated and lead to agreements.
• Address problems, not personalities. Concentrate on the negotiation issues, not on the personal
characteristics of your opponent.
• Pay little attention to initial offers. Treat an initial offer as merely a point of departure.
• Emphasize win-win solutions, assuming a zero-sum game means missed opportunities for trade-
offs that could benefit both sides. So, if conditions are supportive, look for an integrative solution.
• Create an open and trusting climate. Skilled negotiators are better listeners, ask more questions,
focus their arguments more directly, are less defensive, and have learned to avoid words and phrases
that can irritate an opponent.
QUESTIONS FOR CRITICAL THINKING
1. Do you think competition and conflict are different? Explain.

Answer – They are both different and the same. First, they are the same in that there is a struggle over an
issue, a resource, a decision between two or more parties, and a fight for control or power whether it’s
winning a race or arguing over how to handle a labor dispute. They are the same in that they can be personal
or professional in nature, but they are also different. Supposedly, competition is to stay on the “field of
competition,” and not become personal, whereas a major source of conflict is personal. Competition is
universally valued in American culture, whereas it’s still a split decision over the benefits of conflict.
2. “Participation is an excellent method for identifying differences and resolving conflicts.” Do you agree or
disagree? Discuss.
Answer – Participation will do this if there is trust, training in how to facilitate non-personal disagreement, and
a commitment to work together. If these are not present, then participation is worthless.
3. From your own experience, describe a situation you were involved in where the conflict was dysfunctional.
Describe another example, from your experience, where the conflict was functional. Now analyze how other
parties in both conflicts might have interpreted the situation in terms of whether the conflicts were functional
or dysfunctional.
Answer – Students’ examples will vary but should take the criteria for functional and dysfunctional conflict
into consideration; see the answer for #2 above in Questions for Review.
4. Assume a Canadian had to negotiate a contract with someone from Spain. What problems might he or she
face? What suggestions would you make to help facilitate a settlement?
Answer – The text does not provide information directly related to these two nationalities. Students might
draw the following assumptions from two parallel cultures—Brazilians and North Americans—or you may wish
to assign a brief cultural background research assignment to students. Consider bringing in a colleague from
the Modern Languages department to discuss Spanish culture.
5. Michael Eisner, CEO at the Walt Disney Co., wants to stimulate conflict inside his firm, but he wants to
minimize conflict with outside parties—agents, contractors, unions, etc. What does this say about conflict
levels, functional vs. dysfunctional conflict, and managing conflict?
Answer – It suggests that there may be apathy or groupthink going on and Mr. Eisner wants to create more
energy inside the firm. He is probably looking for new ideas, increased communication, etc. He does not,
however, want to create negative relationships with outside parties. He is looking for functional conflict to
improve performance and is not afraid of the challenge to do so.
58
POINT-COUNTERPOINT – Conflict Benefits Organizations

POINT
How stimulating conflict can provide benefits to the organization:

• Conflict is a means by which to bring about radical change.
• Conflict facilitates group cohesiveness.
• Conflict improves group and organizational effectiveness.
• Conflict brings about a slightly higher, more constructive level of tension.
Groups or organizations devoid of conflict are likely to suffer from apathy, stagnation, groupthink, and other
debilitating diseases. Look at a list of large organizations that have failed or suffered serious financial setbacks
over the past decade or two. The common thread through these companies is that they stagnated. Their
managements became complacent and unable or unwilling to facilitate change. These organizations could have
benefited from functional conflict.
COUNTER POINT
All conflicts are dysfunctional, and it is one of management’s major responsibilities to keep conflict intensity as low
as humanly possible because:
• The negative consequences from conflict can be devastating.
• Effective managers build teamwork. A good manager builds a coordinated team. Conflict works against such
an objective.
• Managers who accept and stimulate conflict do not survive in organizations.
From the traditional view, any conflict will be seen as bad. Since the evaluation of a manager’s performance is
made by higher-level executives, those managers who do not succeed in eliminating conflicts are likely to be
appraised negatively. Failure to follow this advice might result in the premature departure of the manager.
Teaching notes:
1. Lead a discussion on how conflict between the student body and the administration could help or hurt your
institution.
2. Create functional/dysfunctional lists on the board, and ask students first how conflict could help the college or
university. Record these under “functional.” In the discussion, see if specific topics or issues are on the
students’ minds.
3. Next, ask how such conflict can harm the institution. Again, record these and solicit specific issues, and record
to whom the costs or “hurts” would apply.
4. Now discuss what would make such conflict functional or dysfunctional.
• Is it the topic?
• The parties involved?
• The history of the issue?
• Student expectation of administration reaction to conflict?
5. Finally, discuss:
• Why have students not spoken up on these issues?
• How could functional conflict be started and managed over a specific issue?
• What are the dangers if it got out of hand?
59
TEAM EXERCISE – A Negotiation Role Play
Purpose: This role play is designed to help students develop their negotiating skills.
Time: Up to 1 hour.
Instructions:
1. Break the class into pairs. Identify one person as Alex and one person as C.J.
• One person will play the role of Alex, the department supervisor.
• The other person will play C.J., Alex’s boss.
• It is easier to manage if all the student pairs sit facing the same way, so you can designate one
side as C.J. and one side as Alex. It will help you keep students’ roles straight during the discussion.
2. Have students read only their portion of the role play.
3. Students should take 15 minutes to think through the facts in this exercise and to prepare a strategy.
4. They then have up to 15 minutes to conduct negotiation.
5. When negotiation is complete, the class will compare the various strategies used and pair outcomes.
The Situation:
Alex and C.J. work for Nike in Portland, Oregon. Alex supervises a research laboratory. C.J. is the
manager of research and development. Alex and C.J. are former college runners who have worked for Nike for
more than six years. C.J. has been Alex’s boss for two years.
One of Alex’s employees has greatly impressed Alex. This employee is Lisa Roland. Lisa was hired 11
months ago. She is 24 years old and holds a master’s degree in mechanical engineering. Her entry-level salary
was $37,500 a year. She was told by Terry that, in accordance with corporation policy, she would receive an initial
performance evaluation at six months and a comprehensive review after one year. Based on her performance
record, Lisa was told she could expect a salary adjustment at the time of the one-year evaluation.
Alex’s evaluation of Lisa after six months was very positive. Alex commented on the long hours Lisa was putting
in, her cooperative spirit, the fact that others in the lab enjoyed working with her, and that she was making an
immediate positive impact on the project she had been assigned. Now that Lisa’s first anniversary is coming up,
Alex has again reviewed Lisa’s performance. Alex thinks Lisa may be the best new person the R&D group has
ever hired. After only a year, Alex has ranked Lisa as the number-three performer in a department of 11.
Salaries in the department vary greatly. Alex, for instance, has a basic salary of $72,000, plus eligibility for a
bonus that might add another $6,000 to $10,000 a year. The salary range of the 11 department members is
$35,400 to $61,350. The lowest salary is a recent hire with a bachelor’s degree in physics. The two people that
Alex has rated above Lisa earn base salaries of $57,700 and $61,350. They’re both 27 years old and have been
at Nike for three and four years, respectively. The median salary in Alex’s department is $51,660.
Alex’s Role:
You want to give Lisa a big raise. While she’s young, she has proven to be an excellent addition to the
department. You do not want to lose her. More importantly, she knows in general what other people in the
department are earning, and she thinks she is underpaid. The company typically gives one-year raises of five
percent, although 10 percent is not unusual, and 20–30 percent increases have been approved on occasion. You
would like to get Lisa as large an increase as C.J. will approve.
C.J.’s Role:
All your supervisors typically try to squeeze you for as much money as they can for their people. You
understand this because you did the same thing when you were a supervisor, but your boss wants to keep a lid
on costs. He wants you to keep raises for recent hires generally in the five-to-eight percent range. In fact, he has
sent a memo to all managers and supervisors saying this. However, your boss is also very concerned with equity
and paying people what they are worth. You feel assured that he will support any salary recommendation you
make, as long as it can be justified. Your goal, consistent with cost reduction, is to keep salary increases as low
as possible.
The Negotiation:
Alex has a meeting scheduled with C.J. to discuss Lisa’s performance review and salary adjustment.
Teaching notes
1. The process for running the exercise is self-explanatory.
2. Consider assigning some pairs a distributive strategy and some an integrative strategy. This will permit a
comparison of results for discussion.
3. Consider your gender mix in the pairs, if you want to include a discussion of male/female negotiating
strategies.
4. For the sake of time, this exercise can also be conducted as a “fish bowl” using only one pair of students and
having the rest of the class observe.
60
ETHICAL DILEMMA – Is It Unethical to Lie and Deceive During Negotiations?
In Chapter 10, we addressed lying in the context of communication. Here we return to the topic of lying
but specifically as it relates to negotiation. We think this issue is important because, for many people, there is no
such thing as lying when it comes to negotiating.
It has been said that the whole notion of negotiation is built on ethical quicksand: To succeed, you must
deceive. Is this true? If so, how can someone maintain high ethical standards and, at the same time, deal with the
daily need to negotiate with bosses, peers, staff, people from other organizations, friends, and even relatives?
We can probably agree that bold-faced lies during negotiation are wrong. Most ethicists would probably
agree. The universal dilemma surrounds the little lies—the omissions, evasions, and concealments that are often
necessary to best an opponent.
During negotiations, when is a lie a lie? Is exaggerating benefits, downplaying negatives, ignoring flaws,
or saying “I don’t know” when in reality you do considered lying? Is declaring that “this is my final offer and
nonnegotiable” (even when you are posturing) a lie? Is pretending to bend over backward to make meaningful
concessions lying? Rather than being unethical practices, the use of these “lies” is considered by many as
indicators that a negotiator is strong, smart, and savvy.
When is evasiveness and deception out of bounds? Is it naive to be completely honest and bare your soul
during negotiations? Or are the rules of negotiations unique: Any tactic that will improve your chance of winning is
acceptable?
Source: Based on M. Diener, “Fair Enough,” Entrepreneur, January 2002, pp. 100–102.
Class Exercise:
Lead a discussion, or break the students into groups to discuss the questions raised in the last paragraph of the
dilemma. Ask them to apply these questions to various situations. Do they come up with different outcomes
depending on the scenario? Why or why not?
Suggested scenarios:
1. Negotiate your salary and benefits package for a job you have just been offered with a new employer. The
employer would like to know what you were compensated in your last job.
2. Negotiate with a vendor who will do extensive renovations of the company headquarters over the next year.
You are on a very tight budget and if you come in under budget, you will be a “hero” and receive a promotion
and bonus.
3. Negotiate a divorce. Your retirement and the savings for your children’s education is at stake. You suspect
your to-be ex-spouse will fritter it away.
4. Negotiate the sale of your house. You are in deep debt and need to maximize the selling price to come out
“unscathed.” You are moving into a very small apartment to save money once the sale is complete.
61
CASE INCIDENT – Working at ThinkLink
Mallory Murray had not had much experience working as part of a team. What little exposure she had had
to teams was in her organizational behavior, marketing research, and strategy formulation courses. When she
interviewed with ThinkLink she did not give much thought to the extensive use of cross-functional teams. She did
tell them she worked well with people and thought that she could be an effective team player.
Mallory joined ThinkLink as an assistant marketing manager for software programs designed to help
students learn algebra and geometry. Mallory’s boss is Lin Chen (marketing manager). Other members of the
team she is currently working with include Todd Schlotsky (senior programmer), Laura Willow (advertising), Sean
Traynor (vice president for strategic marketing), Joyce Rothman (co-founder of ThinkLink, who now works only
part-time in the company; formerly a high-school math teacher; the formal leader of this project), and Harlow Gray
(educational consultant).
After her first week on the job, Mallory was seriously thinking about quitting. Every decision seems to be a
power contest. What makes her job particularly difficult is that she does not have any specific job responsibilities.
Mallory’s project team has a deadline only six weeks away, and they are at least two weeks behind schedule.
Everyone is aware that there’s a problem but no one seems to be able to solve it. Neither Lin Chen nor Joyce
Rothman is showing any leadership.
Questions
1. Discuss cross-functional teams in terms of their propensity to create conflict.
Answer – The peer nature of team members is fertile ground for conflict. Add what appears to be
nondirective leadership and there is a big problem. The intensity of the conflict is hard to gauge since we hear
it only from the newest team member, but it does seem to be dysfunctional in that it is interfering with the task
accomplishment of the group. This particular team appears highly diverse and highly participative—all
elements that add to the potential for conflict.
2. What techniques or procedures might help reduce conflict on cross-functional teams?

Answer – It seems that one key is to clarify intentions. This group’s conflict, especially from Mallory’s
perspective, may be largely a function of the attributing the wrong intentions to the other. When it comes to
reducing conflict, it seems that one of the best ways would be for Mallory to adapt a collaborating perspective,
where she desires to fully satisfy the concerns of all parties. The intention of the parties is to solve the
problem by clarifying differences rather than by accommodating various points of view. Also see Exhibit 14-4
for the major resolution and stimulation techniques that managers can use to control conflict.
3. If you were Mallory, is there anything you could do to lessen the conflict on the core project? Elaborate.
Answer – This may be tough for students to answer, as they may say, “Well, I’m not the boss. What can I
do?” Help students think about what behaviors they can model and what suggestions they can make to Chin
to move the group toward resolution. Mallory (students) may also need to refer to earlier material that explains
how in the development of a group they will become much more productive as time expires and they get
closer to their deadline.
62
Exploring OB Topics on the World Wide Web

Search Engines are our navigational tool to explore the WWW. Some
commonly used search engines are:
www.goto.com
www.google.com
www.excite.com
www.lycos.com
www.hotbot.com
www.looksmart.com
1. Let’s start out with a laugh. Go to dispair.com and see what their commentary is for
dysfunction. Point to: http://www.despair.com/demotivators/dysfunction.html . While you are
there feel free to look at some of the other posters that “spoof” traditional motivational posters
found on the walls of businesses and schools. Enjoy!
2. How do you handle conflict when it arises? Seven guidelines for handling conflict can be found
at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/jordan2.cfm . Think of a conflict you are involved in or have
been involved in recently. How could you have applied these guidelines to that situation? Is
there room for improvement in your conflict management skills? Write a short reflection paper
(or a paragraph or two) on one of the guidelines and how you plan to use it in future conflicts.
3. If you have never been involved in labor negotiations it can be a challenging task—especially if
you lack experience in the process. Preparation is key. Every manager should have an
understanding of the process. Learn more at: http://www.mediate.com/articles/lynnK.cfm . Are
there lessons in this article that could be applied to any negotiation process—for example,
buying a car, negotiating a contract with a vendor, etc.? Think of a circumstance where you
might find yourself explaining a negotiation process to a friend and the skills necessary to be
successful. (Use the article for ideas.) Write out the scenario and skills and bring it to class.
4. Negotiating with other cultures requires an understanding of the culture and the individuals with
whom you are negotiating. Point to: http://www.mediate.com/articles/lauchli.cfm to learn more
about negotiation and dispute resolution with the Chinese. As the book has discussed, the
Chinese are a collectivist culture different in many ways from Americans. Write two or three
things of interest you learned from reading this page and bring it to class.
5. Read the article by Stella Ting-Toomey titled “Intercultural Conflict Management: A Mindful
Approach” at : http://www.personal.anderson.ucla.edu/richard.goodman/c4web/Mindful.htm .
Write a short synopsis of the three major points of the paper. What is the most interesting or
intriguing idea put forth in the paper? Do you agree or disagree with her assessments? Bring
your written work to class for further discussion.
6. The University of Colorado offers a great deal of information regarding conflict management on
their website. One page provides abstracts of selected readings on transformative conflict
resolution. Some readings are more global in nature—others are geared to the organization.
Point to : http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/transform/abslist.htm and select three abstracts of
interest to you. Print them off and bring them to class. Prepare a short presentation on what
you learned from articles. Be prepared to talk about them before the class or in small groups.
7. Conflict resolution processes often involves ethical decisions as well. Read the case found on
the SHRM website and the recommendations offered by other professionals in the field. Point
to: http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles/1101/default.asp?page=1101ethics.asp . Write a
63
short paper describing what your plan of action would be if you were in Janet De Paulo’s
position.
64

Conflict and Negotiation: Learning Objectives

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Conflict and Negotiation: Learning Objectives

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Fourteen

CONFLICT AND NEGOTIATION

After studying this chapter, students should be able to:

A Definition of Conflict Notes:

1. There are several common themes which underlie most definitions:

Transitions in Conflict Thought Notes:

1. The traditional view of conflict argues that it must be avoided—it indicates a

A. The Traditional View Notes:

B. The Human Relations View

1. Conflict is a natural occurrence in all groups and organizations. Since it was

C. The Inter-actionist View

1. The inter-actionist view is the one taken in this chapter.

Functional vs. Dysfunctional Conflict Notes:

OB IN THE NEWS -- Yahoo! Inc.: Suffering from an Absence of Conflict

1. Was the conflict (or lack of it) functional or dysfunctional? Why?

The Conflict Process

A. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility Notes:

A. Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility (cont.) Notes:

• Semantic difficulties are a result of differences in training, selective

• The channel chosen for communicating can have an influence on

MYTH OR SCIENCE – “The Source of Most Conflicts Is Lack of Communication”

B. Stage II: Cognition and Personalization Notes:

C. Stage III: Intentions

1. Intentions are decisions to act in a given way.

C. Stage III: Intentions (cont.) Notes:

4. Five conflict-handling intentions can be identified.

D. Stage IV: Behavior

E. Stage V: Outcomes Notes:

1. Outcomes may be functional—improving group performance, or dysfunctional

E. Stage V: Outcomes (cont.) Notes:

4. Creating functional conflict

1. Negotiation is a “process in which two or more parties exchange goods or

1. There are two general approaches to negotiation: distributive bargaining and

G. Bargaining Strategies (cont.) Notes:

H. The Negotiation Process Notes:

1. A simplified model of the negotiation process is provided in Exhibit 14-7.

H. The Negotiation Process (cont.) Notes:

• Once you have gathered your information, use it to develop a strategy.

5. Bargaining and problem solving:

1. The role of personality traits in negotiation

I. Issues in Negotiation (cont.) Notes:

2. Gender differences in negotiations

I. Issues in Negotiation (cont.) Notes:

• North Americans tried to persuade others by relying on facts and appealing

I. Issues in Negotiation (cont.) Notes:

• An arbitrator is “a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.”

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW

1. What are the disadvantages to conflict? What are its advantages?

3. Under what conditions might conflict be beneficial to a group?

5. How could a manager stimulate conflict in his or her department?

6. What defines the settlement range in distributive bargaining?

7. Why isn’t integrative bargaining more widely practiced in organizations?

8. How do men and women differ, if at all, in their approaches to negotiation?

10. What can you do to improve your negotiating effectiveness?

QUESTIONS FOR CRITICAL THINKING

1. Do you think competition and conflict are different? Explain.

POINT-COUNTERPOINT – Conflict Benefits Organizations

How stimulating conflict can provide benefits to the organization:

TEAM EXERCISE – A Negotiation Role Play

ETHICAL DILEMMA – Is It Unethical to Lie and Deceive During Negotiations?

CASE INCIDENT – Working at ThinkLink

2. What techniques or procedures might help reduce conflict on cross-functional teams?