Introduction

Organisations are arenas in which different individuals and interest groups often compete against one another for access to the organisation’s scarce resources. These ‘battles’ are not necessarily resolved rationally or peacefully but instead may be determined by the individuals and groups using their power to subdue the other individuals and groups. Power is therefore an integral feature of Political Behaviour in organisations and its various facets will be closely examined in this topic. Specifically, we will identify and discuss different sources of power and the ways that it can be translated into action.

With a stronger understanding of Power and Politics we then turn our attention to the challenging tasks of Conflict Management and Negotiation. As detailed in the previous topic, working in groups and teams has become an integral feature of contemporary organisations. Furthermore, it was recognised that while group/team ‘synergy’ offers great (potential) value to the organisation, the practice is also associated with a range of ‘behavioural’ issues that need to be effectively managed. One such issue is that of interpersonal conflict. This topic therefore aims to further develop the capability of students to manage collaboration and conflict in both groups/teams and the broader organisational context.

Objectives

On completion of this topic, you should be able to:

• define power and discuss five key ways (bases) in which it is gained
• identify nine power tactics and their contingencies
• identify the causes and consequences of political behaviour
• define conflict
• explain how perceptions and emotions influence the development of conflict
• outline the conflict process
• identify five conflict-handling intentions
• define negotiation and describe the two general bargaining strategies
• describe the three main forms of third-party dispute resolution.

Approximate study time required

Actively engaging with the lecture content	3 hrs
Topic readings	2 hrs
Undertake the prescribed learning activities	1 hrs
Self-directed topic review	1 hrs
Total	7 hrs

Power

Central to the study of collaboration and conflict in an organisational context is the concept of power. This is because power is the main mechanism by which individuals are ‘encouraged’ to behave in a desired way. Some sources of power are, however, more effective than others. Imagine, for example, that you are asked to work on a project that you have very little interest in. Your level of commitment to the project is likely to depend on whether your participation is influenced by coercion (e.g. being fired from your job if you do not agree) or by the level of admiration and respect you have for the individual who makes the request (i.e. referent power).

Closely related to the various power bases are power tactics. Such methods represent specific ways in which a manager translates their power base into explicit actions. Among the list is ‘rational persuasion’ which is regarded as the only tactic that is effective across all levels of the organisation.

Organisational politics

Organisational politics has a double-edged nature. Organisational politics often involves activities which are aimed at obtaining ends which are personal in nature rather than organisational. However, the distinction between organisational and personal interests is often not very clear cut. A person who is attempting to serve their own personal interests would certainly not admit to so doing, and would claim, instead, that they are taking their actions in the best interests of the organisation. Indeed there may be some merit to their claim. The level of organisational politics is determined by both individual and organisational factors. Thus organisational politics is more likely when the task is unclear, ambiguous and constantly changing; when high level positions are involved; when different groups have conflicting goals; and when resources are scarce. The behaviours reflecting organisational politics are aimed at protecting and enhancing self-interest by activities such as ‘impression management’.

Conflict

Condliffe (1987, p. 78) defines conflict as:

… a form of relating or interacting where we find ourselves (either as individuals or groups) under some sort of perceived threat to our personal or collective goals. These goals are usually to do with our interpersonal wants. These perceived threats may be either real or imagined.

The Condliffe definition focuses on three elements of conflict which are very helpful in explaining the phenomenon. Firstly, the fact that a threat can be perceived is important. There may be an indirect basis for the perceived conflict in terms of no ‘real’ clash of interests or goals between the parties. Nonetheless, it is the fact that a party perceives and therefore experiences conflict that is important. This emphasises the role of perceptions in conflict. As Beebe et al. (2005) point out, no two people perceive the same thing in exactly the same way. Most of the time we are unaware of our own processes of perception, which are filtered through our own self-concept.

What you might perceive to be a simple request from your supervisor to join a particular project team may be perceived very differently from the individual members of the project team. A project team member might perceive the request as a vote of no confidence in the team’s abilities. Another project team member might see this as a positive for their own individual contribution to the project work as you represent an extra set of hands.

The second element of Condliffe’s definition is the fact that conflict is experienced at the interpersonal level (through our interactions with other people). Thirdly, the definition assists us to link conflict with personal and social goals or aspirations.

Emotions also play a significant role in conflict processes. The emotions and feelings experienced by individuals influence their thoughts and behaviours, we do not exist in a vacuum. The effective management of conflict requires a level of awareness of the role of emotions in conflict and how these can be handled more effectively throughout the conflict process. We need to not only become aware and manage the emotions in others but we also need to become aware of our own emotions and manage these appropriately.

Exhibit 13.2 of the text on page 339 provides a comprehensive model of the conflict process.

Conflict can be either positive (functional) or negative (dysfunctional) for organisations. Osland et al. (2007, p. 342) list the benefits of functional outcomes from conflict as: greater clarification and understanding; making organisational values and beliefs more visible; helping to preserve groups and acting as a safety value for ‘letting off steam’; and often results in creative solutions to problems. The outcomes of dysfunctional conflict are: stereotyping; overvaluation of one’s own group; devaluation of other groups; polarisation on issues; decreased communication between individuals and groups; perceptual distortions; and conflict escalation.

Sources of conflict

Conflict manifests itself in the decisions, behaviours and the conflict management styles of those involved. However, it is the underlying sources of conflict that need to be explored so as to gain a deeper and richer understanding of the conflict process and subsequently, a more informed approach to managing the conflict. Six main sources of organisational conflict are:

• incompatible goals
• differentiation – different values/beliefs
• task interdependence
• scarce resources
• ambiguous rules
• communication problems.

Management styles in conflict

Conflict style refers to a ‘consistent pattern or approach you use to manage disagreement with others’ (Beebe et al. 2005, p. 231). What is yours? Do you avoid conflict as it is too unpleasant and you would much prefer to keep things sailing along at a nice even keel? Or do you jump straight in and fight for as much gain as you can get, no matter what anyone else thinks or feels? Or do you like to hear everyone’s side of the story before trying to find a solution?

McShane et al. (2013, p. 353) refer to two main orientations towards conflict: the win-win orientation and the win-lose orientation. The win-win orientation is defined as:

The belief that the parties will find a mutually beneficial solution to their disagreement.

The win-lose orientation is an approach to conflict that contains a:

Belief that conflicting parties are drawing from a fixed pie, so the more one party receives, the less the other party will receive.

Good practice in conflict management is to try for a win-win approach – this is not always possible though, as some conflicts are very difficult to resolve or manage. In some cases the conflict can not be resolved. In some cases the conflict is complex with several issues entwined within and around it and much greater levels of communication and analysis need to be undertaken.

Negotiation

Negotiation is defined by Robbins et al. (2020, p. 361) as:

A process involving two or more parties deciding how to allocate scare resources.

Whereas, Wood et al. (2007, p. 472) defines negotiation as:

… the process of making joint decisions when the parties involved have different perspectives.

The literature identifies two types of negotiation: distributive and integrative. Distributive negotiation usually centres around a zone of agreement where a fixed amount of resources has to be divided up amongst the parties. Integrative negotiation emphasises the interests of the parties rather than their relative positions. The most well-known integrative model was developed by Fisher, Ury and Patton (1991) in the publication Getting to Yes. Integrative bargaining operates under an assumption that there is more than one solution or agreement to a conflict resolution that can create a win-win solution.

Summary

A management survey suggests that a typical manager spends about 20 per cent of their time trying to resolve conflicts. Conflict management skills are therefore essential for organisational success.

A conflict is sometimes resolved through use of power, especially the power to offer extra rewards or to impose additional penalties. There are various bases from which a leader may derive power, such as legitimate power, referent power and expert power. Sub-units in organisations also achieve varying levels of power, with sub-units which perform strategic functions and control resources needed by other sub-units being particularly likely to obtain power. When power is used by individuals or sub-units to achieve personal ends rather than organisational ends, the user is said to engage in organisational politics. The distinction between personal and organisational ends, however, is rather hard to make in many cases, and the users normally assert that they are using their power for the organisation’s benefit.

Effective conflict management requires knowledge of the conflict process and the role of perceptions and emotions within the process. Knowledge and awareness of the varying types of conflict management styles and sources of conflict helps inform the choices and decisions on which approaches are needed for the effective management of the conflict.

At times senior staff need to intervene in conflicts between organisational members and units and so a knowledge and awareness of types of negotiation and dispute interventions is required. The ability to distinguish between power bases and to have a varied repertoire of influence tactics is also an essential requirement to existing effectively within organisational contexts.