Mod-01 Lec-25 Managing Conflict and Negotiation (Contd.)

Just another WordPress site

Mod-01 Lec-25 Managing Conflict and Negotiation (Contd.)

Good morning and welcome to the continuing session of managing conflict and negotiation In the last session we were discussing about the stages of conflict, and we covered till the three stages of conflict which stage one is of the stage of potential opportunity and incompatibility, second stage was that of cognition and personalization, third stage was the intention of conflict. And in the present lecture session we will continue with the fourth and fifth stages of conflict along with the resolution techniques of those conflicts and negotiations So, first we will look into the stage four of conflict, which is the behavior. So, and we find like here it is called the stage IV behavior is called the manifest conflict, where groups actively engage in conflicting behavior. So, till the stage III if we can see the conflict generated it was there and there was an intention to behave in certain ways, but we could not observe the conflict from outside. It is as if the conflict was building in the person’s mind But when it comes to the stage of manifest conflict means it is now getting expressed outside and people who can observe and tell like, these two people are in conflict and it is the behavioral manifestation of the conflict and it is the most difficult stage to control because in at last for quite some time and intensity may vary from like with lies of physical harmer or physical harmer aggressive word stolen all these things, and to then we may move to a greater extent. And then like any time period also it may last for a longer time, and it becomes hard to control like we will control and manage the people and those who are in conflict and tend them down to a calm state. So, it is one of the most difficult of the stage of all the five stages to and it is when conflict becomes a manifest conflict So, if you can see like what could be the different stages or degrees of manifestation as we discussed like from no conflict to annihilatory conflict, we find like it starts from minor disagreements or misunderstanding to overt questioning or challenging of others, assertive verbal attacks, threats and ultimatums, aggressive physical attacks and lastly the overt efforts to destroy the other party. So, if you can see like the intensity increases and more in intensive becomes the more violent it becomes, it becomes really difficult for others present in the situation to control the two parties who are in conflict So, we will next focus into the resolutions So, how this conflict could be resolved through resolutions in that like and it is of a two resolution techniques depends on two important things; one is on internal focus and the other is on external focus. So, internal focus is when the concern extent to which the group is focusing on its own concerns, its own blows

from a particular situation. External focus is when the person or the group wants to take into consideration the concerns of other groups also or other people also involved in the conflict situation. And the degree it is so the groups or if people vary in the degree of their internal focus and the external focus and the combination of this external and internal focus is different resolution approaches and we will discuss each of these resolution approaches in details There are five approaches. So, the first of those approaches is called the dominating approach. So, in dominating approach what happens is there is a maximum focus on the internal concerns. So, it is a power oriented approach and it relies on force. So, and both the groups involved they try to apply force So, it is not that like there this dominating approach is something bad or it does not have its problem related problems. But sometimes it is appropriate in situations like emergency situations or where situations like unpopular actions may be needed to get a grasp over the conflicting situation So, where you have to show your power to get a grasp of the situation in those cases dominating approach is encouraged. Next we have another of this second approach is called the accommodating approach. In accommodating approach, if we can see in dominating approach the focus is more on internal focus like the groups the dominating group focuses more on its personal gain analysis while we are talking of the accommodating approach this is an external focus where we take into consideration the needs, the views of the other group in conflict also like what they want In this approach, the maximum emphasis is on the concern of the other group and its minimizing on one’s own concern. So, it sometimes appears like one party is giving in to the situation. So, I its beneficial where issues over which discussions are made or maybe not that much important for the group which is accommodating, but it is very important for the other group. So, in those situations it is better to use accommodating as a resolution technique. So, sometimes what happens? It purchases credits for future interactions and sometimes this credits are more required and important than of favorable resolution to a particular conflict to this particular conflict which were dealing it now. So accommodating helps to buy those credits Next approach is that of problem solving So, this is theoretically the best approach because we are looking in a very rational way to the problem at hand and we are trying to solve it on the way like it leads to a win-win solution. So, this is a collaborative approach which requires that the groups in conflict. I would like willing enough to work

towards a very integrated solution that satisfies both the parties. So, but one of the major blocks or obstacle is the common win-lose mentality; like whenever we feel like we are in conflict we take it mentally like it is one parties gain and the other parties loss So, this problem solving approach means we find that that barrier while trying to solve in this way So, potential benefits are merges of insight experienced knowledge and for qualities of what that may lead to higher quality for and because both the parties are selecting and like integrated solution, then what happens? Maybe then there is a greater commitment to the solution being sort and less of conflict, how to do it and what to do. So, these could be the possible benefits of the problem solving approach. Next we go to another of the resolution technique which is that of avoiding. In avoiding what happens is it may not bring long term benefits but it is a temporary alternative where and here we take time as the main healing factor and if we feel like the time it is the passage of time, the issues will cool down or it will give us enough time to get more information about certain things So, what we generally do is people tend to avoid the conflicts to and that is why thing used the avoiding approach. It is much more because we do not want to go through the pain of accepting, realizing and then try to find out that there is a conflict and try to find the solution for it; what we try to do is we do avoid the whole issue and keep our self as ignorant of facts like there is a conflict situation. So, overuse of this conflict is due to that factor we want to avoid the pain of conflict and take relative measures and how to solve the issues relating to which there is a conflict Compromising: Compromising is it is a middle of the both approach where both the parties give up some of their own interest and they try to try to adapt to the solution which is not maybe totally ideal for a particular group, but yeah, it is acceptable solution and because it is both the parties feel like they have gained something and also they have lost some part of it. So, and it works best when the goals can be divided equally, but again for that thing compromising the both the parties should be having equal power, then the pairs are strongly committed to mutually exclusive goals and it allows a temporary settlement to a complex problem when it works with a good backup, good back-up strategy So, and in many cases these may involve like third party interventions like arbitration, mediation, etcetera Bringing into real managing conflicts through stimulation, it involves like bringing outside

individuals into the into the group like hiring or transferring individuals whose values, backgrounds differ from those already present in the group. So, it what happens like in within a particular group, there is a diversity of viewpoints and it is encouraged sometimes to get a new ways of looking at things. So, next is altering organization structure will help like a dysfunctional conflict to transform into a functional conflict So, and competition can be created among groups again which will yield a better result in terms of the solutions received from the different groups who are thinking in different ways So, these are ways of transforming a dysfunctional conflict into a functional one So, we can stimulate competition by use of incentives, rewards and bonuses for outstanding performance. So, next point is making use of programmed conflict is where conflict is deliberately introduced into and systematically introduced in a particular situation where in fact no real difference is exactly there This is again done for generating variety of ideas about a particular thing and then those gives sometimes try to um give rise to creative solutions. So, this programmed use of conflict is sometimes there and that way we were talking of again functional conflicts So, popular use is of course the devil’s workshop or the devil’s advocate where one person involves and is deliberately given the role of a critic and his or her job is to uncover all the possible problems with a proposal. So, this helps to have an understanding of all the possible opposing viewpoints before making a final decision The stage five of the conflict is the stage of outcomes and the stage five again could be as we were discussing from the last session could be of like two types of conflict; one is the functional outcome from the conflict and the other is the dysfunctional outcome from the conflict. Functional output from the conflict is when there is increased group performance, increased quality of service decision making, stimulation of creativities there, encouragement of interest and curiosities there and provision of medium for problem-solving So, all these things like the things related to ways of thinking differently doing things differently and like trying to go for creative solutions, these are part of functional outcomes Dysfunctional outcomes are again like development of discontent, reduced group effectiveness, retarded communications, reduced group cohesiveness, etc; these are dysfunctional outcomes from

conflict. So, what we are maybe trying to do is to make a transition from dysfunctional outcomes to the functional outcomes of conflict So, if you are looking into conflict and organizations performance. So, each organization has an optimum level of intergroup conflict. So, too little of conflict hinders innovation and change and too much can produce chaos and threaten the organizational survival So, it is necessary like the organization balances and maintains an optimum level of intergroup conflict So, if you can see from this diagram like there is a relationship between in each performance and the level of conflict. So, it is high when there is an optimum level of conflicting in both the cases; its low in both the cases means even if there is no conflict it is low and performance and even if there is too much of conflict the performance is also low. So, like in the situation A whether is a level of conflict is low or not the type of conflict is dysfunctional and internal characteristics are apathetic, stagnant, nonresponsive to change, lack of new ideas and performance outcome is low when B it is an optimal solution level of conflict The type of conflict is functional in nature and the unit’s internal characteristics are viable, self-critical and innovative and performance outcome is also high. When in the next situation like level of conflict is high and types of conflict is dysfunctional and unit’s internal characteristics are chaotic, uncooperative, that is disruptive in nature, then again also the performance of the organization the unit per se is low So, what we can understand that optimum level of conflict present in the organization helps the organization to perform in a more efficient way at in the optimum level We will move next to the negotiations and what are negotiations? Negotiations is a process in which like two or more parties exchange goods, exchange services and attempt to agree on the exchange rate between them. So, for negotiation at least the presence of two parties is very important and something should be there to negotiate with and attempt should be made to agree on the exchange rate also and both the parties should mutually try to get it in understanding about like what to exchange and how much So, it is again if you see the second part of the definition which in emphasis is given A process in which two or more parties attempt to reach acceptable agreement in a situation characterize by some level of disagreement So, it may be going for negotiation; it is not that everybody gets total agreement to whatever the other parties suggests, but yeah, there is a high degree of agreement and any sort of like

unacceptable factors should be taken care of also. So, both the things are there. The positive agreement between the two parties and also to some sort of disagreement and the disagreement should not be more than the agreement part So, in an organizational context negotiations may take place between two people, within a group, between two groups or over the internet So, what we can see over here like there are different stages and also situations will proceed where the negotiation may take place and it ranges from between two people to that of doing over the internet. Now when we its talking out between two people within the group or between the groups, it is still like maybe we can see there is a face to face factor, but when it is over the internet So, it is more of virtual in nature with lays of human interactions with each other and how far it will be easy to deal with this type of negotiations as what we have to see it through because when we are not meeting face to face maybe some of the things require as a technique of negotiation which we can manipulate or alter based on the feedback from the facial expressions that we are getting; those things not possible to check when we are talking off through internet So, negotiations are characterized by four elements. Number one, some disagreement or conflict is there but it should be that disagreement it should be viewed as where like the conflict where the conflict exists and what is the nature like whether it is perceived, whether it is failed or at the manifested level. So, that is the first step like these disagreements are there but to what level and how it is affecting conflict is what we have to judge. Next is after disagreement, there is some degree of agreement with like degrees of dependency between the two parties. So, is the party are not dependent on each other or one of the parties is not dependent on the other parties. So, then there is no question of conflict because conflict arises when there is a sharing of resources, commonality of goals and we find like we feel like one of the person or the other group is blocking our reach to that particular goal So, if nothing is there of that kind like interdependence is not there then we do not have any conflict. So, third is like the situation

must be conducive enough to interact in an opportunistic way. So, each party must have both the means and inclination to attempt to influence the other. So, opportunity must be given; it is not that there is a conflict and then there are not giving the opportunity to interrupt. Then in those cases negotiations are not going to happen. So, next is and the most important of this things is of course, at least we see like there is some common points regarding which the people will agree Otherwise there is no point in sitting for negotiation if we find like these are the problems and they are been so rigidly dealt with rather that nobody is going to give an inch out from the original position taken Then what happens like there is again no point in negotiating because negotiating is possible only when we feel like we could agree at some commonalities some common points, but if there is no possibility of some agreement then negotiations do not happen. So, these are the five or four important elements of negotiation both the disagreement has to be there, so there is some issue like what we need to decide upon; agreement has to be there between the parties So, that at least we come to some common conclusion and there must be a very conducive favorable situation for negotiation and of course there is some degree of interdependence between the parties, so that they will get encouraged for negotiation. So, these are the four major elements of a good negotiation to happen The bargaining strategies in negotiation are first what we generally understand is win-loss negotiation where one parties gain and merely to other parties loss. So, it is known as distributive negotiation where it is more concerned with the distributing the pleasures and pains of a negotiation process. So, it is it is called distributing like the resources which are used of negotiation and who gains and who losses. So, and it is not like that one it is like in this type of negotiation the pain is taken away by someone and the pleasure the gain of the negotiation is taken away by someone else. So, in that case it is called win-lose negotiation. Win negotiation is where it is a positive sum approach where each party gains without corresponding loss by the other party and what happens is it is not that like I get exactly what I want for or there is some sort of agreement regarding like how far what I want can be reached and so that much has been provided and we are happy with that. So, that is win-win strategy of negotiation So, what we are focusing here is that we do

not guaranty, we do not tell like the parties gain exactly what they wanted from the negotiation process but we can generally tell like both the parties are much better off than they were originally when they started dealing with the conflict and its resolution. So, it is in that way like degree wise what you started with and deal with which dealing negotiations it is much and like enriched journey sort of like when we have started and where we reached. It is not exactly what we wanted but something that we take like are equally important and desirable first and gaining that shows like improvement with and better positioning of the parties compared to when this started and when they are at present and that is why this is called a positive sum approach So, this is called an integrative bargaining So, in bargaining characteristics we find when it is distributive bargaining each person’s tries to snatch away the maximum portion So, it is get as much of pie; in the integrative bargaining is expand the pie. Motivation is in distributive, it is somebody’s gain somebody’s loss but in integrative it is both win-win Focus is on the positions gain and in integrative bargain it is on the interests. The information sharing is low in distributive bargaining and high in integrative bargaining. Then duration of relationship it is shorter in nature and even you are talking of integrative bargaining it’s a long term prospective long term in nature. So, mainly for the time being we are not getting what we exactly wanted and maybe somewhere we have to come just beyond our own internal focus into external focus but integrative bargaining gives a long term of relationship as compared with an external focus and distributive bargaining And here what we find is that there is an aspiration range and there is a settlement range and there is a resistance point. So, what we find is in this picture that there is an overlap between the aspiration range of party A and the aspiration range of party B. So, these are the two maximum resistant points and in between are the settlement range. So, if we are discussing at this zone, then maybe we will go for a better negotiation So, it starts parties A’s points starts from here and after this if asked to change they will go for resistance, party B’s target point starts from here and after B if it is asked to change or further accommodate then it is a resistance. So, this is the settlement range

And so this is the best alternative to negotiated agreement and the lowest acceptable value to an individual for a negotiated agreement So, this is called BATNA What requires here is like the preparation and planning; that is very important like what issues to discuss, how do you prepare for it, what are ground rules of this discussion, so that we follow those rules and there is no overlap of the purpose and the norms are set how to behave. So, people are not putting unnecessary power techniques, etcetera. So, classic clarification and justification based on like why we are going for particular point and how do we justify our own points and then we go for bargaining about how much can be afforded and to what level and how this problem can be solved and lastly is the closure and implementation phase of it and repeating of what we agreed to and how do we implement what to follow and what not to like the do’s and do not’s are to be decided Sometimes there are gender differences in negotiations. But it is thought of like the men are apparently negotiate slightly better outcomes and women’s attitude towards negotiation and their success in negotiators are less favorable than men. So, this could be gender differences Again people from different nations negotiate differently. So, when you are talking of cross-cultural negotiations we have to take into considerations that what are the cultural aspects, non-verbal queues, timeframes, etc of the culture in where the parties belong to and how that can influence the communication and decision making process, then only we can go for a better negotiation. So, in the stages of negotiation we should be careful about the non-task surroundings, and then what is the task-related information exchange that is taken place. Then whether we are persuading each other for accepting the facts and yield towards one of the parties decision and what are the concessions given and if agreement is reached and what is the agreement to live out In cross-cultural negotiation, so it is employing an agent or an adviser in involving a mediator So, induce in the counterpart to follow one’s own negotiation script. So, viewing or adapting to the counterparts negotiation script, coordinating adjustment of both the parties, embracing the counterpart’s scripts and improvising an approach and effecting symphony. So, all these points tell like we have to be very

careful in understanding what other party wants and how and what will make both the parties comfortable with the related to the problem at hand. So, these are very important points of cross-cultural negotiation strategies To pick up any strategy what is important is focusing on one’s own culture. So, where learning the negotiation script which is common to both the counterparts culture and what are the contextual queues of the situation and what it is hinting towards like should we train, should we try to change the way that we are in usually arrive at a new topic, should we buy time, etc. So, predicting what will be approach of the counterpart and how can we influence it and then next choosing a strategy. So, these could be the important points in how to pick up a strategy. So, always like we have to be very good reader of the situation, scanner of the situation and understanding each of the moves of the parties involved in the discussion. So, if we can do those things and understand how this person is going to behave with related to this particular issue and what could be his comments and what could be his error moves and next moves, then we can arrange our own moves in that way and that needs to better negotiation strategy The four factors of negotiating effectively are obtaining substantial results. So, activities that focuses on the content of what is being negotiated, influencing the balance of power through the use of persuasions, facts and expertise, rather than use of dominance, then promoting a constructive climate activities that are designed to facilitate progress and minimize the likelihood that tension or animosities there, then obtaining the procedural flexibility So, activities that helps to increase the negotiating effectiveness by that number of opinions available for conducting the negotiation Other approaches are of course mediation, arbitration, conciliation and consultation So, these generally take place when we are talking of a third party who gets involved in the negotiating process like if the two parties A and B who are in conflict or not able to solve the problem by the different conflict management techniques, helping techniques and the negotiation processes learnt. Then what we do is bring in a third party who may help us to solve the problem. This third party has different roles based on the importance given to the viewpoints of the third party So, what we start of is with mediation where a neutral party acts as a facilitator through the application of reasoning, suggestion and persuasion. Arbitration the third party has the power or authority to impose an agreement Conciliation the third party is someone who is trusted by both the sides and serves primarily as more formal authority to influence the outcome than does a mediator. So, in mediator

it acts as a facilitator but in conciliation the third party more or less gives a judgment and the two parties in conflict have to follow it. Consultation the third party is trained in conflict and conflict-resolution skills and attempts to it problem solving by focusing more on the relationship between the parties than on the substance issues at hand. So, its again assistance given by the third party to view the problem at a different ways maybe to arrive a different problem solutions and then trying to arrive at a particular solution which will be acceptable by all Negotiation techniques can be improved by beginning the negotiation with a positive overture or small concession and then reciprocating the opponent’s concession with smaller smaller concessions. So, concentrating on the negotiation issues and situational factors not on the opponent because it is very important to get the situational queue and understand based on the issues at hand what could be the next moves. So, trying to determine the opponent strategy by looking below the surface and not allowing accountability to one’s constituents or surveillance by them to produce competitive bargaining; so using power in a negotiation sometimes it is required, so again being open to accepting third-party at assistance. If somebody comes and gives help and it is stored like you have to do it at this way that help should be well accepted and recognized by the people who are in conflict and who are to use the factor use the help provided by the third-party and implement it. So, attending to the environment; being aware that the opponent’s behavior and power can also be altered by the present things and situation present in the environment So we will move on to the questions which are, explain conflict in negotiation. Discuss a contemporary prospective on intergroup conflict What causes intergroup conflict? What are the causes of dysfunctional intergroup conflict? What are the ways of managing intergroup conflict through resolution and stimulating constructive intergroup; what are the ways are managing to intergroup conflict resolution and then how it can be nurtured through stimulating constructive intergroup conflict and here you have to discuss certain examples for it So, and again you have to compare which of the techniques is a better one So, again what is negotiation? What are the negotiation techniques followed in the organization So, what could be the issues related to the negotiation and ways in which negotiation effectiveness could be increased in the organization These are some of the questions; if you see these questions these are more application-oriented questions, in the sense like some parts of it the question are application oriented where you find like you have to take into consideration the technique of negotiation, the conflict management technique, etc and tell about its use in situations So, expected answer for this is that it is

not that you only discuss the conflict management techniques or about the intergroup conflict and ways of managing conflictive resolution, etc, etc or negotiation is not enough to mention that its which is applied in which situation and why along with means what is expected here that you know both the pros and cons in all the approaches and taking the situations that particular negotiation technique or conflict and if technique is used you have to tell which is best at that particular situation and why. So, only that idea if developed it will be giving you an idea of which is the better technique to use at what point of time, and that will make you better give you a better understanding of handling conflict more efficiently Thank you