Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Managing conflict is an intellectual challenge to understand and an important practical management issue of which to be aware. Researchers have exposed the traditional idea that conflict is inevitably destructive and demonstrated the value of conflict for solving problems. Indeed, conflict, when well managed, contributes very critically to team and leader effectiveness. Recognizing both the positive and negative consequences of conflicts, researchers have proposed various ways to identify and distinguish the nature of productive conflict. They have identified dynamics and conditions under which conflicts can be constructive for people and their organizations. However, making conflict positive for organizations has proved difficult. This entry first defines conflict and then empirically reviews developed frameworks and comments on their limitations and potential for future development.

Conflict has traditionally been defined as opposing interests involving scarce resources and goal divergence and frustration. Conflict is often thought to occur in mixed-motive relationships where persons have both competitive and cooperative interests. The competitive elements produce the conflict; the cooperative elements create the incentives to bargain to reach an agreement.

However, defining conflict as opposing interests denies the reality that people with cooperative, highly overlapping goals can be and often are in conflict. Project team members committed to the common goal of building a cost-effective information system may well disagree over the most appropriate software system and other means to reach their shared goal. They are also apt to have conflict over the division of labor and the distribution of rewards, despite their common goal.

Defining conflict as opposing interests rather than as incompatible activities confounds conflict with competition, defined as incompatible goals and a win–lose orientation. It is not clear whether the theorized effects of conflict are due to conflict or to competition. The issue of definition is not simply a technical one for researchers. As we will see, the belief that the conflict is competitive in that it involves incompatible interests makes its management difficult. This article uses Deutsch's definition of conflict as incompatible activities: One person's actions interfere, obstruct, or in some way get in the way of another's action.

Conceptual Overview

In focusing on understanding how conflicts can be constructively managed, researchers have developed alternative ways to characterize the methods and choices people have. They have argued that behavioral strategies, conflict type (the content of the conflict), and the biases and motives of the participants are critical for identifying when conflicts can be constructive.

Five Strategy Approaches

Blake and Mouton used the traditional distinction between concern for people and concern for productivity to develop a typology of five strategies for managing conflict. Avoiding conflict reflects that the protagonists have a low concern for both people and productivity, whereas collaborators have a high concern for people and productivity. Forcing communicates a high concern for productivity but a low concern for people; smoothing, a low concern for productivity but a high one for people. Compromise represents moderate concerns for productivity and for people.

The model is thought both to predict strategies people choose as well as to guide conflict management. Collaboration is considered generally the most useful as it results in both quality decisions and strengthened relationships, but other strategies are useful in different situations. This approach clearly communicates that people have choices about how to manage conflict, and the key is to choose a strategy appropriate for the situation. Research has demonstrated that people can distinguish among these five strategies and that typically collaboration is an effective approach to conflict. However, evidence has not developed much on the value of the other approaches and the conditions when they are effective. Kenneth Thomas, Afzal Rahim, and Evert van de Vliert have also prominently contributed to this perspective.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading