Course:

Seminar in Organization Behavior

Chapter 15

Conflict and Negotiation

By
Stephen P. Robbins &
Timothy A. Judge

Director: Pro. Vivian Chen

Reporter: Setyabudi Indartono (9644104605)
 Learning Objective

1. Define Conflict
2. Differentiate between the traditional, human
relation, and inter actionist views of Conflict
3. Contrast task, relationship and process conflict
4. Outline the conflict process
5. Describe the five conflict-handling intention
6. Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining
7. Identify the five steps in the negotiation
process
8. Describe cultural differences in negotiation
Define Conflict

Conflict

A process that bargain when one party

perceives that another party has negatively
affected, or is about to negatively affect,
something that the first party cares about
Differentiate between the traditional, human relation, and inter actionist
views of Conflict

Conflict viewed the belief that

by :
traditional All conflict is harmful and must be
avoided

human Conflict is natural and inevitable

outcome in any group
relation
inter Is not only a positive force in a group
actionist but that is also an absolute necessary
for a group to perform effectively
 Contrast task, relationship and process conflict

Inter actionist conflict views propose:

• Functional conflict: Conflict that supports the goals of
the group and improves its performance
• Dysfunctional conflict: Conflict that hinders group
performance

Conflict type:
• Task Conflict: Conflict over content and goals of the
work
• Relationship conflict: Conflict based on interpersonal
relationship
• Process Conflict: Conflict over how work gets done
 Creating functional conflict
Regarding to the inter actionist view of conflict,
conflict can be created toward function, through
reward dissent and punish conflict avoider
 Encourage people to challenge the system and
develop fresh ideas
• By Reward system dissenters (Hewlett Packard)
• By Criticize the bosses (Herman miller inc)
• By Build evil’s advocates (GE & Anheuser-
Busch)
 Type low moderate High

Task Functional

Relation Dysfunctional

Process Functional

Most studies demonstrate that

1. Relational conflict always dysfunctional.
2. Low level of process conflict are functional
3. Low to moderate level task conflict are functional (dysfunctional
when create uncertainty task role, increase complete task time,
member working cross purposes)
 Outline the conflict process

Conflict Process
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage Stage
4 5
Potential opposition on Cognition and Intention Behavior Outcom
incompatibility personalization (Decision to act (statement es
(when conflict issue in a given way) s, actions,
(presence condition that
tend to be define, reactions )
create opportunity for parties decide what the
conflict to arise) conflict is about)
Antecedent conditions: Perceive Conflict: Conflict Overt Increase
- Communication: Differing awareness by one handling Conflict: d group
word connotations, jargon, or more parties of intentions • party’s perform
the existence of (Assertivenes ance
insufficient exchange of Behavior
condition that s-
information, noise
create opportunities Cooperativene • Other’s
- Structure: Size and degree for conflict to arise ss): reaction Decreas
of specialization, jurisdiction Felt Conflict: 1.Competing ed
clarify, (BU) goal Emotional group
2.Collaborating
compatibility, leadership involvement in a perform
3.Compromising
style, reward system, conflict creating ance
degree of dependence anxiety, tenseness, 4.Avoiding
frustration or 5.Accommodatin
- Personal Variables:
hostility g
Personality, emotion, value
 Describe the five conflict-handling intention

Conflict handling intentions:

1. Competing “ a desire to satisfy one’s interests, regardless of the impact
on the other party to the conflict”  Assertive but uncooperative
2. Collaborating “A situation in which the parties to a conflict each desire
to fully satisfy the concerns of all parties”  Assertive and Cooperative
3. Compromising “A Situation in which each party to a conflict is willing
to give up something”  middle in both Assertive and Cooperative
4. Avoiding “ The desire to withdraw from or suppress a conflict” 
unassertive and uncooperative
5. Accommodating “ the willingness of one party in a conflict to place
the opponent’s interest above his or her own”  Unassertive and
Cooperative
Conflict intensity continuum (behavior)
(Functional to dysfunctional conflict)
1. No conflict
2. Minor disagreement or misunderstanding
3. Overt questioning or challenging of
others
4. Assertive verbal attacks
5. Threats and ultimatums
6. Aggressive physical attack
7. Overt effort to destroy the other party
 Conflict Management
the use of resolution and stimulation techniques to achieve the desire level of conflict

1.Competing  Assertive but uncooperative

1. Assertiveness vs. 2.Collaborating  Assertive and Cooperative
Cooperativeness 3.Compromising  middle in both Assertive
1. cooperative
and Problem solving
2. Superordinates
4.Avoiding unassertive and uncooperative
goals
3. Expansion ofresources
5.Accommodating Unassertive and
Cooperative
4. Avoiding
2. Conflict resolution
technique 5. Smoothing
6. compromise
7. Authoritative command
8. Altering the human variable
9. Altering the structural variable
•Communication
3. Conflict stimulation •Bringing in outsider
technique •Restructuring the organization
•Appointing a devil’s advocate
 Conflict Outcomes
1. Functional Outcomes
• Improve decision quality
• Stimulate creativity and innovative
• Encourages interest and curiosity among group
member
• Provide the medium through which problems can be
aired and tension released
• Foster an environment of self evaluation and change
2. Dysfunctional Outcomes
• Retarding of communication
• Reduction in group cohesiveness
• Subordination of group goals to the primacy of
infighting among member
• Bring group functioning to a halt and potentially
threaten the group’s survival
 NEGOTIATION
A process in which two or more parties
exchange goods or services and attempt to
agree on the exchange rate for them
 Contrast distributive and integrative bargaining

Bargaining Strategies
• distributive bargaining: Negotiation that seek
to divide up a fix amount of resources; a win lose
situation
– Good cop and bad cop tactic
– Revealing deadline tactic
• integrative bargaining: Negotiation that seek
one or more settlement that can create a win-win
solution
 Identify the five steps in the negotiation process

negotiation process
1. Preparation and planning: Answer some questions
(conflict nature, conflict history, involved negotiation, negotiation goals,
the other party’s goal, and the others party’s information) and develop
negotiation strategy

2. Definition of ground rules: Who will do the negotiating,

when, where, limited issues, any specifics procedures? etc

3. Clarification and justification: explain, amplify, clarify,

bolster, and justify the original demand

4. Bargaining and problem solving: give and take in trying

to hash out an agreement

5. Closure and implementation: Formalizing the agreement

 NEGOTIATION ISSUES
• The role of mood and personality traits in
negotiation: Negotiator in positive moods negotiate better
outcomes then in average one. ‘easier’ to predict opponent negotiation
tactics when we know their personality (high risk taker used aggressive
bargainer, best distributive bargainer is disagreeable introvert, checked ego
better negotiator than big ego)

• Gender different in negotiation Women: more

cooperative and pleasant, nicer in negotiation, (managerial women) less
confidence in anticipation of negotiation an less satisfied with their
negotiation performance, more arraign them selves.

• Culture different in negotiation 

 Describe cultural differences in negotiation

Culture different in negotiation

• French like conflict,
• Chinese draw out in negotiation,
• Chinese and Japanese like develop a relationship and
communication (adapted to the situation),
• North American tend on fact and appealing to logic and
important deadline,
• Arab tend to appealing to Emotion and deadline very
casual,
• Russian based on ideal and ignore deadline.
• Different tactics of north America, Japanese and
Brazilian on said “No”, silent lasting, interruption, and
physical contact.
 Third party negotiations
• Mediator: a neutral third party who facilitate a negotiated
solution by using reasoning, persuasion and suggestion s for
alternatives

• Arbitrator : a third party to a negotiation who has the authority

to dictate an agreement

• Conciliator : a trusted third party who provides an informal

communication link between the negotiator and the opponent

• Consultant : an impartial third party, skilled in conflict

management, who attempts to facilitate creative problem solving
through communication and analysis
 Manager Implication
• Optimal enough conflict: prevent stagnation, stimulate
creativity, allow tension to be released, initiate the seeds for change
• Inadequate or excessive conflict: reduce satisfaction of
member, increase absence and turnover rates, lover productivity
• Reduce excessive conflict
– Competition, when quick
– Collaboration, to find integrative solutions
– Avoidance, when issue is trivial, or more important issues are
pressing
– Accommodation, when you find you wrong, and to allow a
better position to be heard
– Compromise, when goals are important
 Another research shows:
• Results indicate significant differences between the two groups. Middle
management prefers the assertive styles (competing and collaborating) with
scant attention to cooperation, while junior management primarily uses the
avoiding style, which is both uncooperative and un assertive..(A. D. Slabbert
Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author Faculty of
Management, Cape Technikon, P.O. Box 652, Cape Town, South Africa)

• when feedback was an issue, a case was two times more likely to settle.
And resolution would be more likely when the filer was a buyer rather than a
seller (STICKS AND STONES:LANGUAGE, FACE, AND ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION,
JEANNE M. BRETT, Northwestern University….., Academy Management Journal 2007, Vol. 50,
No. 1, 85–99.)
 Another research shows:
• Negotiation beliefs have the potential to predict and explain negotiation
performance, implicit negotiation beliefs had a direct causal effect on
negotiators' ability to capture their share of the bargaining pie, negotiators'
beliefs about the malleability of negotiation ability have powerful and predictable
effects on how resources are claimed and created at the bargaining table (Kray LJ,
Haselhuhn MP, Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 0022-3514, 2007 Jul, Vol. 93, Issue 1)

• a self-affirmation unrelated to an identity challenged by a counter attitudinal

communication or divisive negotiation decreases bias and increases open-
mindedness to the communication and to pragmatic negotiation compromise
(Bridging the Partisan Divide: Self-Affirmation Reduces Ideological Closed-Mindedness and Inflexibility
in Negotiation. By: Cohen, Geoffrey L., Sherman, David K., Bastardi, Anthony, Hsu, Lillian, McGoey,
Michelle, Ross, Lee, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 00223514, Sep2007, Vol. 93, Issue 3)

• an interdependent self-construal could lead to more positive behavior on the part

of the high-powered individual, even in a heated hour-long dispute, people may
often be aware that they are using their power in a manner that is unfair to a low-
power party (The role of the self-concept and the social context in determining the behavior of power holders: Self-
construal in inter group versus dyadic dispute resolution negotiations. By: Howard, Elizabeth Seeley, Gardner, Wendi L.,
Thompson, Leigh, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 00223514, 20071001, Vol. 93, Issue 4 )
 Thanks
For your Attentions
 notes
(1) Ok class, this chapter discuses about conflict and negotiation
(2) This chapter has some of learning objective are:
(3) Before we discus more about conflict and negotiation. I’d like to frame the definition of
conflict first. The conflict define as……
(4) There are three general view of conflict. Traditional view, human relation and inter
actionist view.
(5) Inter actionist conflict views, it’s propose ….. And there are 3 type of conflict
are:……Vivian would you give examples of these ones? Type of conflict
(6) There are examples how to create functional conflict as inter actionist view of conflict
(7) Relational conflict always dysfunctional.  it appears that the friction and interpersonal
hostilities inherent in relationship conflict increase personality clashes and decrease
mutual understanding which hinder the completion of organization task ….. Low level of
process conflict are functional ………… Low to moderate level task conflict are
functional (dysfunctional when create uncertainty task role, increase complete task
time, member working cross purposes)  demonstrate positive affect to group
performance because it stimulates discussion of ideas that helps group perform betters

(10) Intensity degree from No conflict behavior mean functional to over effort to destroy the
other party behavior as dysfunctional
(11) I thinks that this point is very interesting to develop research in OB. We can collaborate
with personality trait, organizational environment, etc to get a functional conflict
outcomes. At the last slide I’ll show some the recent research in conflict and negotiation
(13) And the second part of this chapter we discus about negotiation that describe as…
(14) In this chapter we use negotiation term interchangeability to bargaining term. There are
two general strategy of bargaining are:…