AFRAN QALLO COLLEGE

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

OCCUPATIONAL STANDARD: HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT LEVEL IV

Unit Title Handle Dispute management Processes
Unit Code LSA HRM4 05 1221
Unit Descriptor This unit covers knowledge, attitudes and
skills required to the implementation of
mediation processes includes preparing for
mediation, determining the nature of the
dispute, working towards settling the dispute
through mediation, and finalising the
mediation processes, in line with defined
guidelines and procedures.
Elements Performance Criteria
1. Prepare for mediation 1. 1.1 Parties to mediation and dispute
handing activities are identified
1.2 Guidelines and procedures are accessed to
guide dispute resolution
1.3.Parties to dispute are informed for
mediation process
1.4 Agreement is gained for mediation process
to resolve dispute
1.5 Logistics of process for mediation are
communicated for parties to dispute
2. Determine nature of dispute 2.1 Parties to dispute are interviewed
separately to determine their positions in
relation to the dispute
2.2 Positions of parties to dispute are
documented and verification of these positions
is undertake
2.3 Boundaries for allowable options in
dispute are determined
3. Assist and settle dispute through mediation 3.1 Disputing parties are brought together by
mutual agreement
32.Communication techniques are used to
formulate options for resolution of the dispute
Agreement
3.3 Agreement is sought on options identified
3.4 Outcomes of meetings are documented and
verified with parties to dispute
3.5.Process of mediation is followed until an
agreement is reached or pre-determined time
constraints are reached
4. Finalize process of mediation 4.1 Agreements reached in mediation process
are circulated to all parties including the

150
 initiator of the process to ensure that follow-
up actions are implemented
4.2 Process of mediation is reported
4.3 Process of mediation is reviewed by
mediator to identify improvements
4.4 The implemented outcome of the
mediation process is follow up

Overview on conflict and conflict Management

Conflict refers to some form of friction, disagreement, or discord arising within a group when
the beliefs or actions of one or more members of the group are either resisted by or unacceptable
to one or more members of another group. Conflict can arise between members of the same
group, known as intergroup conflict, or it can occur between members of two or more groups,
and involve violence, interpersonal discord, and psychological tension, known as intergroup
conflict. Conflict in groups often follows a specific course. Routine group interaction is first
disrupted by an initial conflict, often caused by differences of opinion, disagreements between
members, or scarcity of resources. At this point, the group is no longer united, and may split into
coalitions. This period of conflict escalation in some cases gives way to a conflict resolution
stage, after which the group can eventually return to routine group interaction once again.
Conflict management is the process of limiting the negative aspects of conflict while increasing
the positive aspects of conflict. The aim of conflict management is to enhance learning and group
outcomes, including effectiveness or performance in organizational setting (Ra him, 2002,
p. 208). Properly managed conflict can improve group outcomes (Alpert, Tjosvaldo, & Law,
2000; Bodtker & Jameson, 2001; Rahim & Bonoma, 1979; Kuhn & Poole, 2000; DeChurch &
Marks, 2001).

M. Afzalur Rakhim notes there is no single universally accepted definition of conflict. He notes
that one issue of contention is whether the conflict is a situation or a type of behavior. Citing a

151
review of definitions of organizational conflicts in 1990 by Robert A. Baron, Rakhim notes the
following common elements in the definitions of conflict

 there are recognized opposing interests between parties in a zero-sum situation;

 there must be a belief by each side that the other one is or will act against them;
 this belief is likely to be justified by actions taken;
 conflict is a process, having developed from their past interactions;

Building on that, the proposed definition of conflict by Rakhim is "an interactive process
manifested in incompatibility, disagreement or dissonance within or between social
entities." Rakhim also notes that a conflict may be limited to one individual, who is conflicted
within himself (the intrapersonal conflict).

To take another definition of conflict, Michael Nicholson defines it as an activity which takes
place when conscious beings (individuals or groups) wish to carry out mutually inconsistent acts
concerning their wants, needs or obligations. Conflict is an escalation of a disagreement, which
is its common prerequisite, and is characterized by the existence of conflict behavior, in which
the beings are actively trying to damage one another.

Rakhim lists some manifestations of conflict behavior, starting with disagreement, and followed
by verbal abuse and interference. Conflicts can occur between individuals, groups and
organizations; examples include quarrels between individuals, labor strikes, competitive sports,
or armed conflicts.

Definition of conflict management

Differences are inevitable in a local group having members with different experiences, attitudes
and expectations. However, some conflicts can support organizational goals. Indeed, too little
conflict may lead to apathy, lack of creativity, indecision and missed-out deadlines. Clashes of
ideas about tasks also help in choosing better tasks and projects. These are ‘functional conflicts’.

Functional conflicts can emerge from leaving a selected incidence of conflict to persist, which
can be overcome by ‘programming’ a conflict in the process decision-making by the group by
assigning someone the role of a critic. This also helps to avoid ‘group thinking’ where group

152
members publicly agree with a course of action, while privately having serious reservations
about it.

The most difficult conflicts are those arising out of value differences. The most important thing
is to understand the real cause of the differences. Yet every resolution of a conflict can also feed
a new conflict in a group. It is, therefore, useful to see conflicts as a series of expressions of
existing differences within a group, having some links to each other. How effectively a group
deals with conflict management largely affects the efficiency level of its functioning.

Conflict vs. Dispute

A conflict is more likely to occur anytime a group is gathered in pursuit of a common goal or
cause, according to the Ohio State University Extension, making work the perfect breeding
ground for conflict. Each person wants to contribute to what he sees as his goal. Conflict results
when people have different visions of the way they do business.

Dispute

A dispute is a disagreement over a particular issue between two people or groups. A dispute is a
short-term occurrence. A common disagreement at work might be who gets to work the best
shift, for instance. If a dispute arises over hours because employees get to choose them,
management will resolve the dispute by assigning their shifts. The incident will not affect their
work throughout the day, however.

Conflict

Conflict results from continual disputes as the frustration level rises, according to the Beyond
Intractability Project. If two workers continually dispute one another over their tasks, for
example, they may begin to see each other as stubborn, aggressive or hostile and develop a
mutual dislike of one another. This can increase their disputes and eventually result in full-blown
conflict over their work1:methods
Activity or a between
differentiate conflict on a personal
functional and level.
dysfunctional
conflict-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------

Activity 2: differentiate between conflict and

153
dispute------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Managing Conflicts

Conflict can occur between individual employees or groups of employees. When a conflict
occurs, it is important to take several steps. The first is to observe the actions of employees,
determine the source of the conflict and listen carefully to everyone involved. Eventually, a
compromise should be reached. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to forge a true
compromise in which the needs of all parties would be met. According to the University of
Wisconsin, it is important to maintain a positive attitude and focus on coming to an agreement
that is the most logical and the best for the organization. Conflict resolution can help individual
team members see their shared goals as employees of a company.

Managing Disputes

The individual workers as well as the management team should be actively involved in
preventing disputes from turning into conflicts. The same basic approach for conflict resolution
can be taken in dispute resolution. The difference between dispute and conflict resolution is
really just the stage at which the problem is addressed. Conflict resolution, especially conflict
between groups, is much more difficult to handle than dispute resolution, which is necessary
damage control.

Employees may have disputes and conflicts about different things, including their tasks, their
relationships to one another, or the way they would like to do things. It is important to notice the
source of the problem. Disputes over simple tasks, for instance, may not result in long-term
conflict. But interpersonal conflicts are likely to take root if problems are not continually
addressed. And some things just blow over. A person might tolerate certain bothersome
behaviors usually, but build resentment that might surface on one or two occasions in the form of
conflict. Later, the person might go back to tolerating the behavior on an everyday basis.

154
 Conflict resolution and conflict management
Conflict resolution involves the reduction, elimination, or termination of all forms and types of
conflict. Five styles for conflict management are as identified by Thomas and Kilmann are:
Competing, Compromising, Collaborating, Avoiding, and Accommodating. (Technical Brief for
the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode, CPP Research Department, 2007). Businesses can benefit
from appropriate types and levels of conflict. That is the aim of conflict management, and not the
aim of resolution.
Conflict management does not imply conflict resolution.

Conflict management minimizes the negative outcomes of conflict and promotes the positive
outcomes of conflict with the goal of improving learning in an organization. (Rahim, 2002,
p. 208). Organizational learning is important. Properly managed conflict increases learning by
increasing the amount of questions asked and encourages people to challenge the status quo
(Luthans, Rubach, & Marsnik, 1995).

Organizational conflict at the interpersonal level includes disputes between peers as well as
supervisor-subordinate conflict. Party-Directed Mediation (PDM) is a mediation approach
particularly suited for disputes between co-workers, colleagues or peers, especially deep-seated
interpersonal conflict, multicultural or multiethnic disputes. The mediator listens to each party
separately in a pre-caucus or pre-mediation before ever bringing them into a joint session. Part of
the pre-caucus also includes coaching and role plays. The idea is that the parties learn how to
converse directly with their adversary in the joint session. Some unique challenges arise when
organizational disputes involve supervisors and subordinates. The Negotiated Performance
Appraisal (NPA) is a tool for improving communication between supervisors and subordinates
and is particularly useful as an alternate mediation model because it preserves the hierarchical
power of supervisors while encouraging dialogue and dealing with differences in opinion.

Types of conflict

Jehn and Mannix have proposed a division of conflicts into three types: relationship, task, and
process. Relationship conflict stems from interpersonal incompatibilities; task conflict is related
to disagreements in viewpoints and opinion about a particular task and process conflict refers to
disagreement over the group’s approach to the task, its methods, and its group process. They note
that although relationship conflict and process conflict are harmful, task conflict is found to be

155
beneficial since it encourages diversity of opinions, although care should be taken so it does not
develop into process or relationship conflict.

Task conflict has been associated with two interrelated and beneficial effects. The first is group
decision quality. Task conflict encourages greater cognitive understanding of the issue being
discussed. This leads to better decision making for the groups that use task conflict. The goal is
to train your team to better solve problems.

The second is affective acceptance of group decisions. Task conflict can lead to increased
satisfaction with the group decision and a desire to stay in the group. Encourage the group
members to respect each others' opinions and to listen carefully. The goal is to train your team to
better work together. Amason and Sapienza in turn differentiate between affective and cognitive
conflict, where cognitive conflict is task-oriented and arises from differences in perspective or
judgment, and affective conflict is emotional and arises from personal differences and disputes.

On the other hand conflicts can also be Substantive versus affective conflicts. The overarching
hierarchy of conflict starts with a distinction between substantive (also called performance, task,
issue, or active) conflict and affective (also called relationship) conflict. If one could make a
distinction between good and bad conflict, substantive would be good and affective conflict
would be bad. Substantive and affective conflicts are related (De Drue and Weingart, 2003).
Substantive conflict involves disagreements among group members about the content of the
tasks being performed or the performance itself (DeChurch & Marks, 2001; Jehn, 1995). This
type of conflict occurs when two or more social entities disagree on the recognition and solution
to a task problem, including differences in viewpoints, ideas, and opinions (Jehn, 1995; Rahim,
2002).

Affective conflict deals with interpersonal relationships or incompatibilities not directly related
to achieving the group's function (Behfar, Peterson, Mannix, & Trochim, 2008; Amason, 1996;
Guetzhow & Gyr, 1954; Jehn, 1992; Pinkley, 1990; Priem & Price, 1991)

Both substantive and affective conflicts are negatively related to team member satisfaction and
team performance (De Drue and Weingart, 2003). Contradicting this, 20% (5 of 25) of the
studies used showed a positive correlation between substantive conflict and task performance.

156
Organizational and interpersonal conflict

 Organizational conflict, whether it is substantive or affective, can be divided into intra-

organizational and inter-organizational.
 Inter-organizational conflict occurs between two or more organizations (Rahim, 2002),
for example, when different businesses compete against one another.
 Intra-organizational conflict is conflict within an organization, and can be further
classified based on scope (e.g. department, work team, individual).

Other classifications of conflicts are intrapersonal and interpersonal conflicts. Interpersonal

conflict refers to conflict between two or more individuals (not representing the group they are a
part of). Interpersonal conflict is divided into intra-group and intergroup conflict. Intra-group
personal conflict occurs between members of the same group. Intergroup personal conflict
occurs between groups (Rahim, 2002).
Activity 3: elaborate the following terminologies:

A. Relationship conflict --------------------------------------------------

6.1. Role of emotion in inter-group relations and conflict
B. Task conflict ------------------------------------------------------------
A key player in inter-group relations
C. Process conflict and conflict is the collective sentiment a person’s own
--------------------------------------------------------
group (in-group) feelsD.toward
Substantive conflict
another group ---------------------------------------------------
(out-group). These intergroup emotions are usually
negative, and range inE.intensity
Affectivefrom
conflict -------------------------------------------------------
feelings of discomfort when interacting with a member of a
certain other group F.to Inter-organizational
full on hatred for conflict------------------------------------------
another group and its members. For example
G. Intra-organizational
in Fischer's organizational research at the conflict -----------------------------------------
University of Oxford, inter-group conflict was so
'heated' that it became mutually destructive and intractable, resulting in organizational collapse.

Out-group-directed emotions can be expressed both verbally and non-verbally, and according to
the stereotype content model, are dictated by two dimensions: the perceived warmth (How
friendly and sincere is the other group?) and competence of the other group (How skillful is the
other group?). Depending on the perceived degree of warmth and competence, the stereotype
content model predicts four basic emotions that could be directed toward the out-group (Forsyth,
2006).
1) Envy- Results when the out-group is perceived to have high competence, but low
warmth (Cuddy, Fiske & Glick, 2007). Envious groups are usually jealous of another

157
 group’s symbolic and tangible achievements and view that group as competition
(Forsyth, 2006).
2) Contempt- The out-group is taken to be low in both competence and warmth (Cuddy,
Fiske & Glick, 2007). According to Forsyth, contempt is one of the most frequent
intergroup emotions. In this situation, the out-group is held responsible for its own
failures. In-group members also believe that their conflict with the out-group can never
be resolved (Forsyth, 2006).
3) Pity- Out-groups that is believed by the in-group to be high in warmth but low in
competence is pitied (Cuddy, Fiske & Glick, 2007). Usually pitied groups are lower in
status than the in-group, and are not believed to be responsible for their failures (Forsyth,
2006).
4) Admiration- Admiration occurs when an out-group is taken to be high in both warmth
and competence, however admiration is very rare because these two conditions are
seldom met (Cuddy, Fiske & Glick, 2007). An admired out-group is thought to be
completely deserving of its accomplishments. Admiration is thought to be most likely to
arise when a member of the in-group can take pride in the accomplishments of the out-
group, and when the out-group achieving does not interfere with the in-group (Forsyth,
2006).

Five beliefs that propel groups toward conflict

Roy Eidelson and Judy Eidelson (2003) investigated some of the important roles that beliefs may
play in triggering or constraining conflict between groups. On the basis of a review of relevant
literature, five belief domains stand out as especially noteworthy: Superiority, injustice,
vulnerability, distrust and helplessness.

Superiority
Individual-level core belief: This core belief revolves around a person's enduring conviction
that he or she is better than other people in important ways. The cluster of attitudes commonly
associated with this belief includes a sense of specialness, deservingness, and entitlement.
Group-level worldview: Many of these elements are also present in the superiority worldview at
the group level. This worldview encompasses shared convictions of moral superiority,
chosenness, entitlement and special destiny. Several joint working committees of the American

158
Psychological Association have identified "belief in the superiority of one group's cultural
heritage (history, values, language, traditions, arts and crafts, etc.) over another's as a defining
characteristic of the phenomenon they termed ethnocentric monoculturalism.

Injustice
Individual-level core belief: The perceived mistreatment by specific others or by the world at
large. This mindset can lead the individual to identify something as unfair which is merely
unfortunate, and thereby to inappropriately engage in retaliatory acts. Group-level
worldview: The injustice worldview reflects the in-groups conviction that it has significant and
legitimate grievances against another group. This mindset can mobilize powerful and violent
collective insurgencies, especially because shared perceptions of injustice typically heighten the
identification and allegiance that individuals feel towards their group. Further, these assessments
of mistreatment are particularly common across cultural divides because different cultures tend
to have different definitions for what constitutes justice, and different norms for how it should be
achieved.

Vulnerability
Individual-level core belief: The vulnerability core belief revolves around a person's conviction
that him or her s perpetually living in harm's way. Vulnerability involves a person's perception of
him or herself as subject to internal or external dangers over which control is lacking, or is
insufficient to afford him or her sense of safety. Group-level worldview: Important parallels to
this individual-level core belief are present in a collective vulnerability worldview that again
appears to be widespread among ethnic groups. Fears about the future are the most common
cause of ethnic conflicts and often produce spiraling violence. The vulnerability worldview is
catastrophic thinking in which a group's imagined worst case scenarios take on the inexorable
logic of inevitability.

Distrust
Individual-level core belief: This core belief focuses on the presumed hostility and malign
intent of others. The critical role played by issues of trust in individual psychological
development has long been recognized. The expectation that others will hurt, abuse, humiliate,
cheat, lie, or take advantage usually involves the perception that harm is intentional or the result
of unjustified and extreme negligence. People who consistently assume the worst about the
intentions of others prevent truly collaborative relationships from developing.

159
Group-level worldview: As an extension of this individual-level core belief to larger groups.
The distrust worldview focuses specifically on perceptions of out groups and revolves around
beliefs that the other is untrustworthy and harbors malign intentions toward the in-group.

Helplessness
Individual-level core belief: The conviction that even carefully planned and executed actions
will fail to produce desired outcomes. In some cases, the individual may perceive him or herself
as lacking the ability necessary to attain a goal. Regardless of the extent to which helplessness is
a matter of distorted perception or objective reality, this core belief tends to be self-perpetuating
because it diminishes motivation. Group-level worldview: The helplessness worldview
describes a collective mindset of powerlessness and dependency. The extent to which a group
perceives itself as helpless reflects assessments not only of its capabilities, but also of whether
the environment is rich or poor in opportunities for group advancement.

Activity 4: list and then describe the five beliefs that propel groups toward
conflict:

A. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
B. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
C. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
D. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Models of conflict management

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

160
A. Early conflict management models

Blake and Mouton (1964) were among the first to present a conceptual scheme for classifying
the modes (styles) for handling interpersonal conflicts in five types: forcing, withdrawing,
smoothing, compromising, and problem solving.

In the 1970s and 1980s, researchers began using the intentions of the parties involved to classify
the styles of conflict management that they would include in their models. Both Thomas (1976)
and Pruitt (1983) put forth a model based on the concerns of the parties involved in the conflict.
The combination of the parties concern for their own interests (i.e. assertiveness) and their
concern for the interests of those across the table (i.e. cooperativeness) would yield a particular
conflict management style. Pruitt called these styles yielding (low assertiveness/high
cooperativeness), problem solving (high assertiveness/high cooperativeness), inaction (low
assertiveness/low cooperativeness), and contending (high assertiveness/low cooperativeness).
Pruitt argues that problem-solving is the preferred method when seeking mutually beneficial
options.

B. Khun and Poole's model

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

 Distributive - Here conflict is approached as a distribution of a fixed amount of positive

outcomes or resources, where one side will end up winning and the other losing, even if
they do win some concessions.
 Integrative - Groups utilizing the integrative model see conflict as a chance to integrate
the needs and concerns of both groups and make the best outcome possible. This model
has a heavier emphasis on compromise than the distributive model. Khun and Poole
found that the integrative model resulted in consistently better task related outcomes than
those using the distributive model.

161
C. DeChurch and Marks's meta-taxonomy

DeChurch and Marks (2001) examined the literature available on conflict management at the
time and established what they claimed was a "meta-taxonomy" that encompasses all other
models. They argued that all other styles have inherent in them into two dimensions - activeness
("the extent to which conflict behaviors make a responsive and direct rather than inert and
indirect impression") and agreeableness ("the extent to which conflict behaviors make a pleasant
and relaxed rather than unpleasant and strainful impression").

High activeness is characterized by openly discussing differences of opinion while fully going
after their own interest. High agreeableness is characterized by attempting to satisfy all parties
involved

In the study they conducted to validate this division, activeness did not have a significant effect
on the effectiveness of conflict resolution, but the agreeableness of the conflict management
style, whatever it was, did in fact have a positive impact on how groups felt about the way the
conflict was managed, regardless of the outcome.

D. Rahim's meta-model

Rahim (2002) noted that there is agreement among management scholars that there is no one best
approach to how to make decisions, lead or manage conflict. In a similar vein, rather than
creating a very specific model of conflict management, Rahim created a meta-model (in much
the same way that DeChurch and Marks, 2001, created a meta-taxonomy) for conflict styles
based on two dimensions, concern for self and concern for others.

Within this framework are five management approaches: integrating, obliging, dominating,
avoiding, and compromising. Integration involves openness; exchanging information, looking
for alternatives, and examining differences so solve the problem in a manner that is acceptable
to both parties. Obliging is associated with attempting to minimize the differences and highlight
the commonalities to satisfy the concern of the other party.

When using the dominating style one party goes all out to win his or her objective and, as a
result, often ignores the needs and expectations of the other party. When avoiding a party fails
to satisfy his or her own concern as well as the concern of the other party. Lastly,

162
compromising involves give-and-take whereby both parties give up something to make a
mutually acceptable decision. (Rahim, 2002).

Counseling and Conflict

When personal conflict leads to frustration and loss of efficiency, counseling may prove to be a
helpful antidote. Although few organizations can afford the luxury of having professional
counselors on the staff, given some training, managers may be able to perform this function.
Nondirective counseling, or "listening with understanding," is little more than being a good
listener-something every manager should be.

Sometimes the simple process of being able to vent one's feelings—that is, to express them to a
concerned and understanding listener, is enough to relieve frustration and make it possible for
the frustrated individual to advance to a problem-solving frame of mind, better able to cope with
a personal difficulty that is affecting his work adversely. The nondirective approach is one
effective way for managers to deal with frustrated subordinates and co-workers.

There is other more direct and more diagnostic ways that might be used in appropriate
circumstances. The great strength of the nondirective approach (nondirective counseling is
based on the client-centered therapy of Carl Rogers), however, lies in its simplicity, its
effectiveness, and the fact that it deliberately avoids the manager-counselor's diagnosing and
interpreting emotional problems, which would call for special psychological training. No one has
ever been harmed by being listened to sympathetically and understandingly. On the contrary, this
approach has helped many people to cope with problems that were interfering with their
effectiveness on the job.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

There are many ways to resolve conflicts - surrendering, running away, overpowering your
opponent with violence, filing a lawsuit, etc. The movement toward Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR), sometimes referred to simply as conflict resolution, grew out of the belief
that there are better options than using violence or going to court. Today, the terms ADR and
conflict resolution are used somewhat interchangeably and refer to a wide range of processes
that encourage nonviolent dispute resolution outside of the traditional court system. The field of
conflict resolution also includes efforts in schools and communities to reduce violence and

163
bullying and help young people develop communication and problem-solving skills. Common
forms of conflict resolution include:

 Negotiation is a discussion among two or more people with the goal of reaching
an agreement.
 Mediation is a voluntary and confidential process in which a neutral third-party
facilitator helps people discuss difficult issues and negotiate an agreement. Basic
steps in the process include gathering information, framing the issues, developing
options, negotiating, and formalizing agreements. Parties in mediation create their
own solutions and the mediator does not have any decision-making power over
the outcome.
 Arbitration is a process in which a third-party neutral, after reviewing evidence
and listening to arguments from both sides, issues a decision to settle the case.
Arbitration is often used in commercial and labor/management disputes.
 Mediation-Arbitration is a hybrid that combines both of the above processes.
Prior to the session, the disputing parties agree to try mediation first, but give the
neutral third party the authority to make a decision if mediation is not successful.
 Early Neutral Evaluation involves using a court-appointed attorney to review a
case before it goes to trial. The attorney reviews the merits of the case and
encourages the parties to attempt resolution. If there is no resolution, the attorney
informs the disputants about how to proceed with litigation and gives an opinion
on the likely outcome if the case goes to trial.
 Community Conferencing is a structured conversation involving all members of
a community (offenders, victims, family, friends, etc.) who have been affected by
a dispute or a crime. Using a script, the facilitator invites people to express how
they were affected and how they wish to address and repair the harm that
resulted.
 Collaborative Law refers to a process for solving disputes in which the attorneys
commit to reaching a settlement without using litigation.
 Negotiated Rulemaking is a collaborative process in which government agencies
seek input from a variety of stakeholders before issuing a new rule.

164
  Peer Mediation refers to a process in which young people act as mediators to
help resolve disputes among their peers. The student mediators are trained and
supervised by a teacher or other adult.

Activity 5: describe the following terminologies:

A. Negotiation ----------------------------------------------------------------
-
B. Mediation-------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Arbitration------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Mediation-Arbitration ----------------------------------------------------
E. Early Neutral Evaluation -------------------------------------------------
F. Community Conferencing -----------------------------------------------
G. Collaborative Law---------------------------------------------------------

Common ways of dealing with conflicts within a group

1) Avoiding - withdraw from the conflict situation, leaving it to chance.

2) Harmonizing - generally cover up the differences and claim that things are fine.
3) Bargaining - negotiate to arrive at a compromise, bargaining for gains by both parties
4) Forcing - push a party to accept the decision made by a leader or majority.
5) Problem solving - confront differences and resolve them on a collaborative basis.
6.2. Conflict-management styles
 Collaborating - Conflicting parties jointly identify the problem, weigh and choose a solution.
 Accommodating - Playing down differences while emphasizing commonalties.
 Competing - Shows high concern for self-interest and less concern for the other’s interest.
Encourages ‘I win, you lose’ tactics.
 Avoiding - Either passive withdrawal from the problem or active suppression of the issue.
 Compromising - A give-and-take approach involving moderate concern for both self and
others. Each party has to give up something of value. It may include external or third party
intervention.

165
 management
approach
Conflict-
Situation

Forcing Accommodating Compromising Collaborating Avoiding

Conside
rations

High Low Medium High Low

importa
Issue

nce

Low High Medium High Low

Relation

importa
ship

nce

High Low Equal-High Low-High Equal-High

Relativ

power
e

Med-High Med-High Low Low Med-High

constr
Time

aints

Matching conflict management with process of goals-setting by the group

Conflict- Appropriate situations

handling style
 When both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised
Collaboratin

 When objective is to learn

 To merge insights from people with different perspectives
 To gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus
 To work through feelings that have interfered with a relationship
g

 · To allow a better position to be heard and to show reasonableness

Accommodati

 When issues are more important to others than yourself

 To build social credit for later issues
 To minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing
 When harmony and stability are especially important
ng

 To allow subordinates to develop by learning from mistakes

 When quick, decisive action is vital
Competin

 On important issues where unpopular actions need implementing

 On issues vital to organization and when you know you are right
 Against people who take advantage of non-competitive behavior
g

166
  When an issue is trivial, or more important issues are pressing
 When you see no chance of satisfying your concerns
Avoiding  To let people ‘cool down’ and regain perspective
 Gathering information supersedes the immediate decision
 When others can resolve the conflict more effectively
 When goals are important, but not worth potential disruption of
more assertive modes
Compromising

 When equal power opponents are committed to mutually exclusive

goals
 To find temporary settlements of complex issues
 To arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure
 As a backup when collaboration or competition is unsuccessful

6.3. Comparison of conflict-handling styles

For the detail of this thing, look at in to the following table

Supporting
Objective
Approach

rationale

outcome
posture

Likely
Your

Solve the “This is my position, The positions of both The problem is most
problem what is yours?” “I am parties are equally likely to be resolved.
together committed to finding important (though not Also, both parties are
Collaborating

the best possible necessarily equally committed to the

solution.” “What do valid). Equal emphasis solution and satisfied
the facts suggest?” should be placed on the that they have been
quality, outcome and treated fairly.
fairness of the decision-
making process.
Don’t “How can I help you Maintaining Other person is likely
Accommodating

upset the feel good about this harmonious to take advantage.

other encounter?” My relationships should be
person position isn’t so our top priority.
important that it is
worth risking bad
feelings between us.”

Get your “I know what’s right” It is better to risk You feel vindicated,
Competing

way Don’t question my causing a few hard but other party feels
judgment or feelings than to defeated and possibly
authority.” abandon an issue you humiliated.
are committed to.

167
 Avoidin Avoid “I’m neutral to this Disagreements are Interpersonal problems
having to issue.” Let me think inherently bad because don’t get resolved,
deal with about it.” “That’s they create tension. causing long-term
conflict someone else’s frustration manifested
g

problem.” in many ways.

Reach an “Let’s search for a Prolonged conflicts The participants
Compromising

agreement solution we can both alienate people from become conditioned to

quickly live with so we can their work and seek expedient rather
get on our work.” engender bitter than effective
feelings. solutions.

An Overview of the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)

Because no two individuals have exactly the same expectations and desires, conflict is a natural
part of our interactions with others. The TKI is a self-scoring assessment that takes about fifteen
minutes to complete. Interpretation and feedback materials help you learn about the most
appropriate uses for each conflict-handling mode.

The TKI has been the leader in conflict resolution assessment for more than thirty years. This
instrument requires no special qualifications for administration. It is used by Human Resources
(HR) and Organizational Development (OD) consultants as a catalyst to open discussions on
difficult issues and facilitate learning about how conflict-handling modes affect personal, group,
and organizational dynamics. More than 7,000,000 copies of the TKI have been published since
1974. Besides its native language, the TKI is also available in Spanish, French, Portuguese,
Danish, Dutch, Swedish, Japanese, and Chinese (traditional and simplified).

The TKI is designed to measure a person's behavior in conflict situations. "Conflict situations"
are those in which the concerns of two people appear to be incompatible. In such situations, we
can describe an individual's behavior along two dimensions: (1) assertiveness, the extent to
which the person attempts to satisfy his own concerns, and (2) cooperativeness, the extent to
which the person attempts to satisfy the other person's concerns.

168
These two basic dimensions of behavior define five different modes for responding to conflict
situations:

1. Competing is assertive and uncooperative-an individual pursues his own concerns at

the other person's expense. This is a power-oriented mode in which you use whatever
power seems appropriate to win your own position-your ability to argue, your rank, or
economic sanctions. Competing means "standing up for your rights," defending a
position which you believe is correct, or simply trying to win.
2. Accommodating is unassertive and cooperative-the complete opposite of competing.
When accommodating, the individual neglects his own concerns to satisfy the
concerns of the other person; there is an element of self-sacrifice in this mode.
Accommodating might take the form of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another
person's order when you would prefer not to, or yielding to another's point of view.
3. Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative-the person neither pursues his own
concerns nor those of the other individual. Thus he does not deal with the conflict.
Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically sidestepping an issue, postponing an
issue until a better time or simply withdrawing from a threatening situation.
4. Collaborating is both assertive and cooperative-the complete opposite of avoiding.
Collaborating involves an attempt to work with others to find some solution that fully
satisfies their concerns. It means digging into an issue to pinpoint the underlying needs

169
 and wants of the two individuals. Collaborating between two persons might take the
form of exploring a disagreement to learn from each other's insights or trying to find a
creative solution to an interpersonal problem.

5. Compromising is moderate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. The objective

is to find some expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both
parties. It falls intermediate between competing and accommodating. Compromising
gives up more than competing but less than accommodating. Likewise, it addresses an
issue more directly than avoiding, but does not explore it in as much depth as
collaborating. In some situations, compromising might mean splitting the difference
between the two positions, exchanging concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground
solution.

Activity 6: elaborate the following basic terminologies:

A. Competing------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Accommodating ----------------------------------------------------------------
C. Avoiding--------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Collaborating -------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Compromising ------------------------------------------------------------------

Remarks

Each of us is capable of using all five conflict-handling modes. None of us can be

characterized as having a single style of dealing with conflict. But certain people use some
modes better than others and, therefore, tend to rely on those modes more heavily than others—
whether because of temperament or practice. Your conflict behavior in the workplace is
therefore a result of both your personal predispositions and the requirements of the situation in
which you find yourself. The TKI is designed to measure this mix of conflict-handling modes

Seven Types of Narrative Conflict

Every work of literature, and much nonfiction narrative, is based on at least one of the following
conflicts. When you write a story or a biography, or relate a true event or series of events, you need not
focus on such themes, and there’s no reason to state them explicitly (except in passing, perhaps, to
provide insight about a biographical subject), but you’re wise to identify the conflicts inherent in your
composition and apply them as you write.

170
 A. Person vs. Fate/God: This category could be considered part of conflict with self or
with society (many people count only four types of conflict, including those two and
conflict with another person or with nature). That’s a valid argument, as one confronts
fate as part of an internal struggle and religion is a construct of society, but explicitly
naming fate (Oedipus Rex) or God -or the gods (The Odyssey)- as the antagonist is a
useful distinction.
B. Person vs. Self: A person’s struggle with his or her own prejudices or doubts or
character flaws constitutes this type of conflict (Hamlet).
C. Person vs. Person: Any story featuring a hero and a villain or villains (The Count of
Monte Cristo) represents this type of conflict, though the villain(s) is/are often
representative of another antagonist in this list, whether a villain is in essence an alter
ego of the protagonist (thus representing the conflict of person versus self) or stands in
for society.
D. Person vs. Society :When the protagonist’s conflict extends to confronting
institutions, traditions, or laws of his or her culture, he or she struggles to overcome
them, either triumphing over a corrupt society (I draw a blank here), rejecting it
(Fahrenheit 451), or succumbing to it (1984).
E. Person vs. Nature: In this conflict, the protagonist is pitted against nature (Robinson
Crusoe) or a representation of it, often in the form of an animal (Moby Dick).
F. Person vs. Supernatural: Superficially, conflict with the supernatural may seem
equivalent to conflict with fate or God, or representative of a struggle with an
evocation of self (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) or nature (The Birds). But this category
stands on its own feet as well.
G. Person vs. Technology: Humanity’s innate skepticism about the wonders of
technology has resulted in many stories in which antagonists use technology to gain
power or in which technology takes over or becomes a malign influence on society
(Brave New World).
Unit summary

Conflict refers to some form of friction, disagreement, or discord arising within a group when
the beliefs or actions of one or more members of the group are either resisted by or unacceptable

171
to one or more members of another group. Conflict can arise between members of the same
group, known as intergroup conflict, or it can occur between members of two or more groups,
and involve violence, interpersonal discord, and psychological tension, known as intergroup
conflict. The most difficult conflicts are those arising out of value differences. The most
important thing is to understand the real cause of the differences. Yet every resolution of a
conflict can also feed a new conflict in a group. It is, therefore, useful to see conflicts as a series
of expressions of existing differences within a group, having some links to each other.

Conflict resolution involves the reduction, elimination, or termination of all forms and types of
conflict. Five styles for conflict management are as identified by Thomas and Kilmann are:
Competing, Compromising, Collaborating, Avoiding, and Accommodating.

Study hint

Immediat

Response
Your
Terms To Be

e
Discussed
No

Yes

No
1. Conflict
2. Conflict Management
3. Functional conflicts
4. The most difficult
5. Conflict vs. Dispute
6. Managing Conflicts
7. Managing Disputes
8. Conflict resolution and conflict management
9. Types of conflict
10. Role of emotion in inter-group relations and conflict
11. Five beliefs that propel groups toward conflict

172
 12. Models of conflict management
13. Counseling and Conflict
14. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
15. Common ways of dealing with conflicts within a group
16. Conflict-management styles
17. Comparison of conflict-handling styles
18. Overcome Your Fear of Confrontation and Conflict

Self test questions

Part I: Say either true or false.

1. Negotiation is a discussion among two or more people with the goal of reaching an
agreement.
2. Conflict is always dysfunctional.
3. Peer mediation has no this much significant impact on the performance of the
organization.
4. Conflict always has got an inverse relationship with the overall performance of the
organization.
5. Conflict management minimizes the negative outcomes of conflict and promotes the
positive outcomes of conflict with the goal of improving learning in an organization.
6. Negotiated Rulemaking is a collaborative process in which government agencies seek
input from a variety of stakeholders before issuing a new rule.

Part II: choose the best answer among the given alternatives.
1. Point out the true statement among the following!
A. Conflict managements totally identical with conflict resolution
B. Disputes and conflicts are two different things
C. Organizations can sometimes have functional conflict
D. None

173
2. Point out the one that is not the element of beliefs that propel groups toward conflict
A. Superiority D. Distrust
B. Injustice E. Helplessness
C. Vulnerability
3. -------------------- is a voluntary and confidential process in which a neutral third-party
facilitator helps people discuss difficult issues and negotiate an agreement.
A. Mediation D. Early Neutral Evaluation
B. Arbitration E. Community Conferencing
C. Mediation-Arbitration
4. Point out the one that in the domain of Common ways of dealing with conflicts within a group
A. Avoiding
B. Harmonizing E. Problem solving
C. Bargaining F. None
D. Forcing

174
5. ---------------------------is assertive and uncooperative-an individual pursues his own concerns
at the other person's expense.
A. Competing D. Collaborating
B. Accommodating E. Compromising
C. Avoiding
6. Point seven types of narrative conflict:

A. Person vs. Fate/God

B. Person vs. Self
C. Person vs. Person
D. Person vs. Society
E. Person vs. Nature
F. Person vs. Supernatural

173
174