View
227
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
CONFLICT COMMUNICATIONPart II
CHAPTER 8Anger
ANGER
What is Anger? Anger is important—large effects on social
relationships Anger is a strong feeling of displeasure
Antagonism and rage are synonymous Different from hurt or irritated May lead to revenge and/or violence Anger can sometimes be used constructively
*MISCONCEPTIONS
We are not capable of controlling destructive anger
Uncontrolled and destructive anger expression is natural
Uncontrolled and destructive anger expression is a force that must be “released” E.g. “venting,” “letting off steam,” ”blow your
top” Others cause our anger
ANGER
Most common between close ties More contact More caring about the actions/feelings of the
other Greater interdependence
Relationship success matters more More confident that expression is acceptable
Greater predictability
ANGER
• Anger manifestations:– 1. One type occurs instantly with no malice or
forethought• Even in people not generally viewed as hostile or
aggressive.
– 2. Another form festers away over time• Revenge.
– 3. A third type is attached to one’s personality: trait-like• Beneath the surface• Can quickly manifest when individuals feel pressured,
defensive, attacked, told what to do (control)
ANGER
Type 3: trait-like anger: Enduring disposition to experiencing anger more
frequently, more intensely, and for a longer Often tuned to anger-related words Responds to anger words more quickly than to other
emotion words People who have low-anger trait tend to
spontaneously reframe the circumstances in ways that deflect or inhibit their anger
ANGER
• Different sources of anger: loss of control, frustration, fear, insecurity, loss, sadness
• Men and women experience it differently– Men: anger is empowering—they have power
and it gives them more– Women: emerges out of feelings of frustration
and powerlessness• As people age:
– Less likely to exhibit trait anger.– Anger for older adults (~50s and up) is less
frequent and less intense– Less overt displays of anger
ANGER
Managing Anger: Three Different Ways of Expressing or Not
Expressing One’s Anger: “Anger-Ins” (hold it in) “Anger-outs” (express it) “Anger controllers” (manage it)
ANGER
Anger-ins: Difficulty in admitting that they are angry Know that they are angry but don’t want to tell
the other person Tell others about their anger Generally passive aggressive.
ANGER
Anger-outs: Automatic reactions, quick to criticize, blame,
and accuse Minor aggressive acts such as bickering Verbal aggression Physical aggression, force
ANGER
• Anger controllers:– Think positively about conflict
• Use techniques to better manage it
– Collaborate and work together toward mutually satisfactory solutions
– Use the S-TLC system– Negotiate rather than compete– Manage the conflict climate and stress levels– Use assertive communication behavior
• Employ the steps of the interpersonal confrontation ritual
ANGER
• Interpersonal confrontation ritual:– Identify problem(s)/needs/issues
• Be honest, be complete• Many people can’t remember what they were fighting
about
– Signal the need to talk• In a way that doesn’t threaten face or inflame
– Confront: talk about your problem• Be assertive, not aggressive
– Listen to feedback– Resolve: seek mutual agreement
• Seek compromise as a last resort
– Follow up: set a time/place
ANGER
• What to do before expressing (or withholding) anger– *Take time out– Use relaxation exercises– *Engage in self-talk– Seek alternative ways to release anger– *Uncover the emotion that is disguised as anger– *See your part in the problem– *Mentally switch places with the other
ANGER
• If you must expressing anger: do it effectively– Don’t: yell, make threatening gestures, curse or
swear, threaten, mock, or use alcohol as a means of courage
– Express after cooling down– Direct at the target– Restore a sense of justice– Regain control– Don’t invite retaliation– Anticipate the effect of your words and actions– Try to keep the other focused on the here and
now
ANGER
If another is the one in anger: Remain calm Acknowledge the source of anger Listen and reflect Walk away if necessary
But promise to engage later
MANAGING “FACE”Chapter 9
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
• What is it?– Impression or “image” people have of
themselves• *Based on the approval and acceptance of others• “Looking glass self”
– Isn’t necessarily very accurate– One of our most valuable possessions– Often very fragile– Heavily guarded; well defended
• All this is “impression management”
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Fundamental assumption: People are motivated to create and maintain
impressions of themselves (core of many conflict situations)
Demands of “face”: Create and sustain self-identity; create, protect,
and maintain others’ identities When people lose face: shame (self-focused)
and/or guilt (behavior-focused) May also seek retaliation
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Positive face: A positive and consistent self image that is
accepted by the group, peers, others We want to feel that others approve and agree
with this (somewhat fictional) self image Desire to be liked and admired Relates to self-esteem issues
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
• Face-threatening act: acts that conflict with the face wants and needs
• Autonomous face (also “negative face”):– I’m in control of my fate, responsible; mature– I’m self-sufficient, independent, reliable– May be seen as “silent leaders”
• “I’m part of the team, but I lead by example”
– Impose on my freedom to be in control: face threat (respond with defensiveness)– Psychological reactance
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
What triggers negative face threats? Threat, order, warning, request, reminder,
suggestion, advice, promise, expressions of admiration, envy, hated, lust
We can signal that we have weak negative face: Expressing thanks, accepting thanks, accepting
an apology, accepting an excuse, accepting an offer
OTHER “FACE” CONCEPTS
Fellowship face: Need to be seen as a valued member of the
group Focus on cohesiveness, equal participation, etc. Don’t stand out from the others
Competence face Our desire to be identified with a role
E.g. I’m the computer expert. I’m very competent I want to be seen as reliable by my peers Threaten: defensiveness
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Protecting others’ autonomy face: Ask open-ended questions Listen without judging Explore options Don’t exclude others
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Facework: Establish/maintain impressions of ourselves to
others; support or deny the impressions that others are making
"the communicative strategies one uses to enact self-face and to uphold, support, or challenge another person's face" (Masumoto, Oetzel, Takai, Ting-Toomey, & Yokochi, 2000).
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Preventive facework—tactics See the situation from the other’s perspective
How does the issue affect the other and the other’s self-image?
Initially (at least) accept what the other person says at “face” value
Accept the other person’s right to change his or her mind
Avoid face-threatening topics; use communication practices that minimize threats to face.
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Preventive facework—tactics Use politeness and disclaimers
Hedging: indicate uncertainty and receptivity to suggestions
Cognitive disclaimer: asserting that the behavior is reasonable and under control, despite appearances
Credentialing: indicating you have good reasons and appropriate qualifications for your statements
Sin license: indicating that this is an appropriate occasion to violate the rule; not a character defect.
Appeal for suspended judgment: asking the other to withhold judgment until it is explained.
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Supportive Facework helps reinforce the way the other is presenting himself or herself 1. Do I try to make the other feel important? 2. Do I try to make the other look good to other
people? 3. Do I try to make the other think that they are
winning? 4. Do I try to make the other feel secure? 5. Do I try to make the other believe that I am
honest and trustworthy?
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Corrective Facework : statements meant to ameliorate the effect of face-threatening messages 1. People overestimate their own level of
cooperation and underestimate the other person’s
2. Scanning: checking out the perceptions created Question the other to confirm
3. Explaining: used when we perceive that the other has not taken our message in the way we meant it
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Repair Sequence (ritual) 1. Offending situation: the other’s behavior is
perceived as intentional and hurtful Whether accurate or not Face threatening: hard to continue until addressed
2. Reproach: request for an explanation of an offense from the one offended Verbal, nonverbal, aggressive, passive-aggressive If perception (step 1) is inaccurate, this can be a
trigger
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Repair Sequence (continued) 3. Remedy (account):
Refuse to act or even note (most unsatisfying) Provide an account (explanation: excuse or
justification) Concessions admit the offender’s guilt and offer
restitution Apologies are admissions of blameworthiness and
regret on the part of the offender supplied by an offender
4. Acknowledgment: evaluation of the account supplied by the one offended We’re even, we’re OK, I accept your reason Or, rejection of the remedy
IMAGE RESTORATION REMEDIES
Excuse Impairment, diminished responsibility,
scapegoat status, victim of sad circumstances, etc.
Justification No harm occurred, it was deserved, other
people do it, I meant well, I had a responsibility to do it
Concession I admit it, let me make it up
Apology I admit it, and I truly regret it
Weak restore
Strong restore
APOLOGIES
Admission of blameworthiness AND regret Request for pardon, self-castigation, help Offender wants to restore positive face Appearance of a genuine apology can lessen
emotional state of those with high trait hostility
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Conflict And Impression Management In Cyberspace Attractiveness of friends who leave messages on
person’s wall in Facebook affects impressions of that person’s attractiveness
Comments made by others about a person on his or her profile are more influential in creating impressions than self-made statements
Facebook used more by socially adept people to strengthen relationships than by socially anxious people to create them
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Responding to Others Results indicate that apologies and/or offering
some corrective action were seen as the most appropriate and effective ways to restore one’s image
CONFLICT AND FACE ISSUES
Conflict And Impression Management In Cyberspace In their study of online conflict, Smith,
McLaughlin, and Osborne found that few people replied to reproaches and seldom completed the traditional repair sequence
Negative conflict behaviors were more frequent in CMC than FTF
Higher levels of avoidance and lower levels of forcing in computer-mediated negotiation
FORGIVENESSChapter 10
FORGIVENESS
Is there an event in your life that you find difficult to forgive? Why? What would it take for you to forgive? What are the consequences of forgiving? What have been the consequences of not
forgiving?
FORGIVENESS
Most important part of conflict management Only way to transform the meaning of the event Only way to minimize the likelihood of repeating
the event Repeats become more destructive with each iteration
Not needed in every conflict situation Depends on intimacy of relationship, degree of
outcome importance Conscious decision to reduce our focus on the
event We decide not to change the future based on the past We decide to move beyond “victimization”
FORGIVENESS
Reconciliation: The process of restoring a damaged relationship
(creating a new one, more accurately) Forgiving and reconciling are not the same
We can forgive, but choose not to reconcile (or even let them know we forgive)
Forgiving and reconciling are not one-time events We tend to return to them cognitively and
emotionally We deal with different parts over time
Competent conflict managers use forgiveness and reconciliation strategies effectively Develop a repertoire of responses
Without competence in forgiveness and reconciliation skills, relationships will end
And generate history, feelings, and other effects that persist
FORGIVENESS
Relational Transgressions Concern core relational rules
Expectations about the way we should behave toward others and the way they should behave toward us
We assume a truth bias toward friends and lovers.
Deception: deliberately altering information to change a person’s perceptions
We assume a helping orientation toward friends and lovers
Violations leave strong emotional residues
FORGIVENESS
Forgiveness: cognitive process; letting go of feelings of revenge and desires to retaliate. Aids in transforming the meaning of the event, or
changing the way we view the event and the person Reframing is key
Unforgiveness: cognitive process; not letting go of feeling of revenge and retaliation
Revenge: “an eye for an eye.” Reconciliation: behavioral process; actions
to restore a relationship or create a new one Distinct from forgiveness.
FORGIVENESS
Advantages Of Forgiveness Mental Health
Raises self-esteem and lowers depression Physical Health
Unforgiveness creates stress; harsh long-term effects Higher levels of pain for trait-based unforgiveness
Widely demonstrated links to cardiovascular health
Why don’t we forgive? Other hasn’t admitted wrongdoing, apology
insincere, desire to be a victim Empathy skill leads to higher levels of forgiveness
Age—younger (college age study) = harder Don’t know how, no support
FORGIVENESS
Working through forgiveness Can be taught: it’s a skill
Levels of Forgiveness Forgiveness for own sake (it’s healthy, feels
better) Forgiveness because of empathy: understanding
that the other needs forgiveness, or… Forgiveness for the sake of the relationship (not
necessarily the other or self) Higher level of empathy: he/she is “like me”
(difficult) Even higher level of empathy: “I am like him/her”
(most difficult) I could do this to others, too
FORGIVENESS
Working Through Reconciliation (optional) Levels of Reconciliation
No reconciliation: repression, victim status, low trust, bitterness
Possible reconciliation: Usually after admission
Conditional reconciliation After expression of regret and apology
Processual reconciliation Some attempt at a remedy
Restoration
FORGIVENESS
Working Through Reconciliation (cont.) Steps toward Reconciliation
1: Account and apology (we usually need these to proceed)
2: Acceptance of account and apology or its absence We must reframe the other and the event
3: Forgiveness may or may not be verbally communicated We may simply act as though it’s forgiven
4: Transforming the relationship, if desired Less intimate, more intimate, different type of
relationship 5: Actions confirm forgiveness and reconciliation
Beware negative self-fulfilling prophecies: we can create the behaviors in the other we expect to see
Create positive self-fulfilling prophecies
FORGIVENESS
Working Through Reconciliation (cont.) Forgiveness and reconciliation feed each other in
ongoing relationships: After forgiving one another, we tell each other that the
act is forgiven, which allows us to act without reference to the offense
In turn, we feel better about our relationship and can talk about our relationship without reference to the offense.
In turn, actions confirm words which creates the reality of our forgiveness.
FORGIVENESS
Moving Beyond Victimization: We tend to want to find someone to blame (not
ourselves) Sometimes, we must forgive without
communication When reconciliation is not safe, not possible, not
desired by you. Not desired by the transgressor, etc. In these cases, any expression of anger, hurt, etc. may
make it worse: we can’t risk the vulnerability We learn to “move on”; drop the baggage Seeking revenge hurts us more We MUST do this if we want to continue interaction
Sometimes realize that, like us, the other is doing the best that he/she can
FORGIVENESS
Seeking forgiveness (offender initiated) Offender experiences feelings of shame and guilt
for the offense Offender makes a decision to seek forgiveness Offender expresses remorse and repentance
Victim should recognize that this is humbling, it puts the offender in a vulnerable position
Final stage of seeking forgiveness: waiting Difficult Tell ourselves that we did all we could
MEDIATIONChapter 11
MEDIATION
Shift from dealing with our own conflicts to helping others resolve theirs
When should we (do we) intervene? When people can’t/won’t do it themselves
Mediator/mediation is not: Conciliation, ombudsperson, arbitration, and
adjudication/litigation Mediators are unbiased third parties who
facilitate communication between conflicting parties Parties work out their own agreement
DISPUTEWhen those involved cannot work out the conflict by themselves
A conflict does not necessarily result in a dispute
WHY MEDIATION OR OTHER ADRS?
High case load in the courts Less expensive than litigation
Often compulsory Greater level of confidentiality Greater level of control of those involved in
the process
MEDIATION
Typical mediation; 1. One or both disputants seek mediation or a
mediator talk them into it. 2. The mediator brings the disputants together
and makes an opening statement. 3. Following the opening statement, each person
takes a few minutes to describe the dispute from his or her point of view without interruption.
4. The mediator finds common ground on which to build agreement.
5. The mediator writes up the final agreement. 6. The mediator ends the mediation.
MEDIATION
Terms: ADR: alternatives to dispute resolution Adjudication: neutral judge and jury hear both
sides and decide (ADR) Either side can appeal
Arbitration: neutral third party hears both sides and makes the decision (ADR) More binding that adjudication (can’t appeal)
Ombudsperson: an ADR where one side has a person that “cuts through the red tape” (usually when dealing with governmental agencies)
Caucus: when the mediator talks to one side alone
MEDIATION
Conciliation: (ADR) neutral third party practices “shuttle diplomacy” by traveling back and forth between conflicting parties unable to meet
Mediation: (ADR) neutral third party facilitates communication between the conflicting parties; they work out mutually acceptable agreement Mediators have no decision-making power
MEDIATION
Mediation reduces the BATNA of the disputants Mediators help to restore communication and
normalize relations Mediation allows for full participation by the
conflicting parties Mediation has a high success rate (80%)
Formal versus Informal Mediation Formal: satisfactory agreements are often
worked out at a single session lasting 1–3 hours Informal: people can help others without their
being formally trained and certified.
MEDIATION
The Role of the Mediator The “principle of three” effect
Two parties: encourages win/lose. Third person signals the public/social attention (face pressure)
A mediator has no decision-making power regarding the outcome of the mediation
The mediator should develop a “subjective neutrality” Honors the validity and truth of each person’s story
without deciding who is right or wrong Mediators must maintain confidentiality Mediators must give equal time/treatment Mediators should not be close with either party
MEDIATION
Mediators must be competent in communication Be descriptive, not judgmental (e.g., “It seems like
you are raising your voice,” versus “It sounds like you are angry”)
Be specific (e.g., “You say you are bothered you are by your colleague’s work habits. What specific habits?”)
Focus only on behaviors that one can change Give timely feedback when it is requested, as close
as possible to the behavior being discussed Speak only for yourself (e.g., “I understand you to
say…” “I take it that you feel…” “I want you both to…” “I prefer to keep my opinions to myself.”)
Check what you see or hear with the other parties
MEDIATION
Mediators encourage cooperation and discourage competition between the parties
Mediators as Communication Rules Enforcers Rules are obligations and prohibitions (what we
may and may not say in certain situations). In opening statements, mediators define the
communication rules for the mediation. They enforce those communication rules. They steer the disputants through the steps of
mediation. They manage the tone of the discussion. They ask disputants to change focus when needed;
keep them on task
TYPICAL RULES Taking turns to talk without interruptions Talking without expressing hostility to one another Creating a positive climate; no put-downs Focusing on the future (what the parties will do)
rather than the past (what was done) Striving for a win–win solution (no one feeling
dissatisfied or agreeing to something unacceptable) Focus on solving the problem rather than attacking
or blaming the other person Being honest and sharing thoughts and feelings
without fear of criticism or publicity Adhering to time constraints/other rules set by
mediator
THE MEDIATION PROCESS:
1. One or both disputants seek mediation, or mediators talk them into it (the intake process).
2. The mediators bring the disputants together and make an opening statement, which includes:
Participation in mediation is voluntary and the mediator or conflicting parties may terminate it at any time
The mediator is unbiased What is said in mediation is confidential That the goal is a written agreement with which
both parties are satisfied or at least comfortable
MEDIATION: OPENING STATEMENTS
That the mediator is an unbiased facilitator of discussion and does not make decisions
That the parties should talk to and look at one another rather than at the mediator.
That the parties will take turns talking without interruptions (nonverbal either)
That the parties must adhere to time constraints set by the mediator
That the parties strive to solve the problem rather than attack, blame, express hostility
MEDIATION: OPENING STATEMENTS
That a positive climate with no put-downs will be enforces
That focus will be on the future That they can openly share thoughts and
feelings without fear of criticism or publicity That a win–win solution is the target (define as
no one feeling dissatisfied or agreeing to something either party finds unacceptable)
That the parties agree to abide by additional rules as announced by the mediator during the session.
MEDIATION
3. Following the opening statements, each person to takes a few minutes to describe the dispute without interruption
Sometimes it is useful for mediators to caucus Their may be some information that one disputant
doesn’t want to reveal in the presence of the other Caucus should be offered to the other side
4. Find common ground (to build agreement on)
Use fractionation, framing (posing good questions with no blame language), reframing (mediators restate negatively loaded, biased, or accusatory statements) Helps the disputants look at the issues differently
MEDIATION
Final Agreement: A list of behavioral commitments that
enumerates specific observable actions each party needs to take to fulfill the agreement
Ending the Mediation Each disputant receives a copy of the
handwritten, signed agreement. If appropriate, the mediators set up a date for reviewing and evaluating the agreement
Mediators thank the parties and wish them well Unlike formal mediation, in informal mediation, no
need to file paperwork, have typewritten agreements, etc.
HTTP://WWW.LAW.HARVARD.EDU/MEDIA/2001/09/14/PON_STLD.MOV
VIDEO: Typical Mediation
CHAPTER 12Managing Conflict from a Theoretical Perspective
CONFLICT THEORY
Understanding theories: Not the same as having the skills
Theories allow us to carry skills from one situation to another
Allow us to apply them appropriately within situations A skill is a learnable behavior, a person can improve it
INTRAPERSONAL THEORIES OF CONFLICT
Psychodynamic Theory People experience conflict because of intrapersonal (internal, psychological, emotional, mental) states
Helps explain: Displaced conflict: acted out over the right issue, but
with the wrong person/thing Often a more socially acceptable or weaker target (if
the actual target is highly valued or has greater power)
Misplaced conflict: acted out with the right person, but over the wrong issue Often over “safe” rather than suppressed issue
Overblown conflict: conflict receives more attention than it really deserves Often to release pent-up energy
PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORY
The “id”: The unconscious aspect that “contains everything that is
inherited, present at birth, or fixed in the constitution” Contains the libido:
The source of instinctual energy, which demands discharge through various channels
Operates on the “pleasure principle”: Tension-reduction process: tension from a bodily need is
translated into a psychological wish to reduce the tension Seek pleasure and avoid pain: only satisfaction; no regard
for the cost of doing so
PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORY
The id is in conflict with the superego Perfects and civilizes behavior Suppress all unacceptable id urges Two components:
Ego ideal: the internalized idea of what a person would like to be
Conscience: morals and other judgments concerning correct and incorrect behavior
PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORY
Ego: mediates between the id and the superego
Governed by the “reality principle”: satisfies the id's desires in realistic and socially appropriate ways
Weighs the costs and benefits before acting
Effects identified by psychodynamic theory Anxiety: tension when people perceive danger Repression: another defense mechanism when
we try not to think about the situation Frustration: results from the internal battle
between the id and superego that often erupts into conflict with others Sources: tension, stress, insecurity, anxiety, hostility,
sexual urges, or depression.
ATTRIBUTION THEORY
People act in conflict situations because of inferences they make about others based on their behavior Internal attributions about another:
E.g.: e.g. he hates, she’s stupid, he’s evil, she’s angry, etc.
Often results in name-calling (you cheat, idiot, lazy, good for nothing, etc.) and assigning blame (it’s all your fault)
External attributions for oneself A way to avoid blame (it’s my parents’ fault that I am
this way, I can’t help that I didn’t go to the right school) Avoid giving credit to others where it is due (e.g. you got
the job because you graduated from the right school)
Attribution Theory Fundamental attribution error: overestimate the
internal factors and underestimate the external factors in perceptions in others’ behaviors E.g.: “Look at what Sue is doing: she’s obviously got no
talent talking to customers” Instead of: “Sue having difficulty making a connection
with customers today. I wonder is she’s feeling the stress from her recent divorce”
Self-serving bias: When we assign our successes to internal factors and our failures to external factors E.g.: I was really good today with my employees; I have
great “people skills.” I had no luck reaching Mike, though; “he’s not a team player”
SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY
We make decisions based on cost/benefit analyses of outcomes of relationships Benefits and costs: material, social, emotional, intellectual, etc. Relationship viewed as a positive is more likely to progress
towards greater depth/breadth OUTCOME = BENEFITS – COSTS
Perception issue, not reality CL = comparison level = threshold of perceived happiness
from a relationship Depends on our/their history Sequence matters (when the good/bad event occurs) Trends matter (a perceived increase/decrease of good/bad
events) SATISFACTION = OUTCOME - CL
Perception issue, not reality
SOCIAL EXCHANGE CLalt = comparison level of alternatives
How attractive are other choices? What will be the outcome of continuing? Optimum situation when both parties find that:
outcome > CLalt > CL If so, relationship will become deeper
Alternatives: affected by extrinsic and intrinsic factors Extrinsic (outside influences): e.g. where you go to
school Intrinsic (internal influences): e.g. you are shy
DEPENDENCE = OUTCOME - COMPARISON LEVEL OF ALTERNATIVES Perception issue, not reality
CONFLICT THEORY
Social Exchange applied to conflict management Third party intervention may lead a person to
examine the current relationship and perceive inequity in it: creating conflict
Mediator can reframe issues to “redo the math”
GROUP CONFLICTChapter 13
HOW DOES GROUP CONFLICT DIFFER?
Group conflicts are unique Type of interdependence among the parties
Organizational in nature Workplace relationships (boss–employee, colleagues,
department heads, employee–public, etc.) *We are better deception-detectors at work
Familiarity, but less truth bias Group conflicts are distinct from:
Formal grievances: must be resolved by third parties (e.g.: human resources specialists)
Litigation: lawsuits and issues involving regulatory agencies that oversee an organization.
THE NATURE OF CONFLICT IN GROUPS
Types of Conflict Instrumental/task: disagreement between
supervisors and subordinates or among members of a team over how to get a job done
Relationship: power, trust, supportiveness, competition, and IP relationship rules Including those in task-oriented groups
Identity: when face issues are threatened Process: disagreements over the management
style Lack of agreement on departmental or organizational
process goals
THE NATURE OF CONFLICT IN GROUPS
Information processing perspective: Assumes that conflict has a curvilinear
relationship with cognitive flexibility, creative thinking, and problem-solving abilities
At low levels of conflict, groups may not experience enough stress to think actively: may ignore important information.
At high levels of conflict, groups are unable to process information well: performance suffers
GROUP CONFLICT
Conflict acts as a group developer (e.g.: Tuckman’s stages) Forming: confusion over expectations,
uncertainties, power, identity, inclusion, boundary-testing. Conflict is withheld or poorly managed Not much gets done (no productive conflict)
Storming: conflict between belonging and independence. Confusion about goals and purpose, leadership model. Can be short or long Some groups never leave Some groups never leave (minutia-driven): maturity
issue Can be very unpleasant to those averse to conflict Tolerance of others is key to successfully moving on Leaders must not be too restrictive at this stage
GROUP CONFLICT
Tuckman’s stages Norming: all systems operational: productivity
emerges. Members accept roles, purposes, norms Trust and structure stage Unity emerges: start acting like a team, not individuals
Performing: rare: Members are very interdependent, yet are very autonomous: little supervision required Dissent is both allowed and welcomed (provided it is
presented in the accepted fashion) Conflict focuses individuals on outcome-driven action
Termination: mandatory or voluntary dissolution of the group Even the loss of a single member can shift the group
into another stage
WHEN CONFLICT CREATES POOR OUTCOMES
Role Conflict Not just a job assignment: the expected
characteristics of the person who fills the role. Formal role: from the assigned position in a group or
organization Organizational chart or “chain of command” reflects
these formal roles; prescribes who is supposed to report to whom.
Informal roles in groups and organizations arise from the communication and interactions
Both cause conflict
GROUP CONFLICT
Role conflict: Depends of the type of role
Task (usually formal): asking for and giving information, opinions Promotive
Maintenance (formal or informal) confirming others, supportive messages Promotive
Disruptive (informal): self-centered, diverts group off task Could be task and maintenance roles that do not
serve the outcome; they are not promotive, they are disruptive
TOO MUCH COHESIVENESS: GROUPTHINK
“… when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive in-group that it tends to override realistic appraisals of alternative courses of action” (Janis, 1982, p.9)
GROUPTHINK SYMPTOMS
Illusion of invulnerability (optimism): Relieves us of responsibility to make difficult rational
decisions. Also, self-esteem and consistency issues Rationalization (especially negative information) Illusion of morality Stereotyping of outgroup members and leaders
(us against them thinking) Peer pressure: dissent against the group
members that disagree Self-censorship Illusion of unanimity (silence is approval bias) Mindguarding (usually self-appointed)
GROUP CONFLICT
Abilene Paradox Group actions that no one (members) wanted to
take Action anxiety: we often act based on what we believe
others expect us to do Even if we disagree, or we’re wrong about the others.
Supported by: Negative fantasies (perceived risk): unrealistic
visualizations of harmful effects resulting from acting the way we think we should: excuse for not acting.
Fear of separation: ostracism is the most powerful punishment
Real risk: operates no differently from perceived risk Confusion of fantasies and reality: we make the fantasy
reality (self-fulfilling prophecy): Fantasized risk becomes real
GROUP CONFLICT
Lucifer Effect Zimbardo (Stanford Prison Experiment) Usually in unusual, high pressure situations
Circumstances overwhelm the individual The point where we “cross the line“ Often occur when constraints are released
Rules are unquestioned: we obey without thinking We cannot separate “me” from the role expected of us Roles we play become so entwined we no longer think
about what we are doing or what others expect of us
GROUP CONFLICT
Strategies to Resolve Conflict (chapter 3 issues): Contend (compete) Collaborate Avoid Compromise Accommodate
Bias toward cooperation leads most people to try to collaborate
GROUP CONFLICT
Relationship issue: conflict is best avoided Research: avoiding responses to relationship-
oriented conflicts: higher levels of team performance Contending or collaborating responses lowered team
performance overall Avoiding responses better for two reasons:
Relationship conflict is difficult to settle to mutual satisfaction Cooperative and understanding unlikely to solve the
problem; makes it bigger and intractable Collaborating and contending responses direct team
members away from their tasks and teamwork Focus on interpersonal relations: team functioning
and effectiveness suffers
GROUP CONFLICT
Best Practices Develop a habit of cooperation; manage (not
maximize) group cohesiveness Groups that trust one another handle conflict in more
productive terms. Avoid, at least initially, relationship-oriented
conflicts Better resolved over time as team members come to
know one another better. Approach process and task-related conflicts in an
expedient manner, favor collaborating strategies as a way to explore alternatives for future behavior.
MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTChapter 14
MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT
Effects of organizational conflict: Lowered productivity Less creativity Less innovation Prolonged, unresolved conflict Negative consequences for team members’
health
MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT
Organizational Diversity and Conflict: Diversity-based conflict: when personal
characteristics (cultural, ethnic, racial, etc.) are the source
Social category characteristics (age, ethnicity, gender, etc.) and informational characteristics (work experience, education, values, beliefs, etc.) contribute to diversity-based conflict.
Civility as a Response to conflict: Attitude of respect toward others manifested in our
behavior toward them; not predicated on how we feel about them in particular How we act, not think or feel
MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT
Civility: Mindfulness of the dignity of the other person in
your sphere at all times The sum of the many sacrifices we are called to
make for the sake of living together Rules for civility at work:
Best words when caught in an unexpected, emotional-charged situation: no words at all.
Use words respectful of the specific listener to whom they are addressed (not some generic “rule”)
Respect the reality of the situation: use temperate, accurate, non-inflammatory, words when describing or commenting on ideas, issues, or persons
MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT
Civility: Use objective, nondiscriminatory language that
respects the uniqueness of all individuals. Respect your listeners by using clean language
all the time on the job Civility is two commitments:
(1)Do no harm to others harm; (2) do good for others. When we disagree, civility requires that we be
honest about our differences; manage rather than suppress or ignore them
Civility requires that we come into the presence of others with a sense of gratitude, rather than duty and obligation.
MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT
Work-life conflict A. Work–life conflict: a balance between one’s
personal life and the demands of work. Includes: Hours Vacation Childcare Wireless technology Time Roles at work vs. roles at home
WORKPLACE BULLYING: FROM PLAYGROUND TO BOARDROOM
A frequent, enduring abusive interaction distinguished by targets’ inability to defend
Bullying has four specific features: Intensity Repetition Duration Power disparity.
Bullying intends to control or harm others through insults, gossip, criticism, ridicule, etc.
Bullying is a pattern of abuse that persists; The longer the bullying, the greater the harm
(physical, mental, emotional)
MANAGING BULLIES
Reverse discourse Tactics of responding to the bully through
communicative means (e.g. turning an insult into a compliment)
Use of lawyers, outside experts Formal or informal grievance against the bully
E.g. the confrontational ritual presented in chapter 2 Doesn’t always work, particularly at work
Subversive (dis)obedience: passive-aggressive behavior (chapter 3)
Retaliation: hostile gossip and/or fantasies for physically harming or killing the bully
MANAGING BULLIES
Psychological detachment Creating a sense of being away from work
Collective voice When employees talk amongst themselves about
their experiences and what they can do about them
Exodus. works well when one is only in a temporary situation A person can quit, make a threat to quit, put in
for a transfer, or aid others in quitting
SOCIAL CONFLICTChapter 15
SOCIAL CONFLICT INTRODUCTION
Clash of different and conflicting value systems “Intractable issues”
Transcends those involved Clash of social or cultural, religious, political, or
economic philosophies Each party doesn't understand why the other
doesn’t “get it” Slogans and simple answers substitute for
arguments Can descend into violent behavior
@SOCIAL CONFLICT
Intractable issues appear like normal conflict: Fail to agree on their goals; see activities as
incompatible; feel relational rules have been broken Intractable issues add a difference:
Become entrenched in “right and wrong” issues These fundamental assumptions operate below awareness
This is “pluralism” The “socio-cultural reality of discrepant worldviews,
ideologies, and moral frameworks, existing side by side”
We characterize people as other, strange, different from ourselves Fueled by distrust and dislike; self-perpetuating;
difficult to bring to any kind of resolution.
SOCIAL CONFLICT
Understanding intractable issues When conflicts become too entrenched,
participants do not desire communication with the others Resort to static evaluations: name-calling; stereotyping
When involved in intractable conflict: We addresses “the choir” eloquently, with
elaboration and nuance When address “outsiders” in a simplified and
defensive way They become the aggressor, oppressor Violence is sometimes viewed as necessary for self-
protection
SOCIAL CONFLICT
Intractable issues often involve: States or other actors with a long sense of
historical grievance, and a strong desire to redress or avenge
A long period of time Intangibles: identity, sovereignty, values, beliefs Polarized perceptions of hostility and enmity Behavior that is violent and destructive Buffer states that exist between major power
blocks or civilizations Resistance to management efforts History of failed peacemaking efforts
SOCIAL CONFLICT
Silence—ignoring the needs of the other and the other entirely
Group-based hatred: when person or group: Seeks to deny person or group their identity Seeks to deny person or group security, or the
ability to pursue goals E.g. the homeless seeking shelter, abortion protestors
blocking the entrance of clinics Seeks to put themselves ahead of others in the
social, political, or economic structure Seeks to control resources in a win–lose conflict
Where no expansion of resources is possible (Israel and Palestine example)
SOCIAL CONFLICT
Patriotism and nationalism Patriotism: love of one’s country and a
willingness to defend it from invaders Nationalism: love of one’s nation as it will be
once: It has exterminated all its enemies Becomes totally unified Achieves its “grand purpose” of world-historical
destiny
THEORIES OF SOCIAL CONFLICT
Critical theory Understanding situations by analyzing power
relations between participants Uncover oppression, exploitation, and injustice
Oppression: one group or set of groups are able to dominate and exploit another group or set of groups
Exploitation: economic, physical, or psychological
Injustice: perpetrated by dominant social classes Exploitative wage labor, poverty, homelessness, lack
of access to adequate education or health care.
THEORIES OF SOCIAL CONFLICT
Critical theory The primary method of critical theory is praxis. It
requires: The conflict mediator to examine his or her own
assumptions about the conflict How do values impact the way the conflict is viewed.
The conflict mediator to look for ways in which people are allowed access to the expression of ideas on the conflict Is one group allowed better access than the other? Does one group have more resources than the
other? Does one group have more right to define the
conflict than the other group?
THEORIES OF SOCIAL CONFLICT
Ripeness theory Occurs when conflict participants realize that
they are involved in a mutually hurting stalemate Neither can get the advantage, and all actions hurt
both self and other) Both recognize a mutually enticing opportunity (both
may gain without giving away something of value). Social exchange: emphasize factors that create
pain for the participants They need to understand that the status quo will
continue to increase pain and suffering Look for factors that can tip the participants
toward “ripeness” by making destructive conflict less attractive and peace more so
WAYS OF APPROACHING THE OTHER
Demonize the other Treating individual or group as
someone/something to be feared and eliminated Romanticize the other
Consider the other as far superior to ourselves. Colonize the others
Treating them as inferior, worthy of pity (perhaps) or (more likely) contempt
Generalize the other Treating people as nonindividuals
WAYS OF APPROACHING THE OTHER
Trivialize the other Ignoring what makes the other different
Not an individual
Homogenize the other Claiming there really is no difference between them
and ourselves Not an individual
Vaporize the other: Refuse to acknowledge the presence of the other at
all (e.g. ignore those who might hand us a leaflet or ask us for money)
Embrace the other (readjust our identities) What kind of “self” do I need to be to live in
harmony?
MANAGING CONFLICT THROUGH NONVIOLENT COMMUNICATION (NVC)
NVC: more than just “civil”; desire to help NVC: make observations (not evaluations),
state needs, make requests (that allow for a “no”) No judgments, force, or demands)
NVC driven by both language AND thinking Compassionate giving (like a spiritual practice: a
desire to help others AND ourselves)
EFFECTIVE COMPLIMENTS
Even saying, “you’re great” is a judgment Often not very effective (may sound like an auto-
response) Worthwhile compliments should be very specific
and behavioral They identify:
The cause: the specific actions that led to the effects
The effects: The particular needs of ours that have been fulfilled The good feelings engendered by the fulfillment of those
needs
Sometimes, a “thank you” is fine, but people appreciate the specifics more
COMPLIMENTS
Compare: “Wow, thanks a lot!” “Wow, I’m so glad you took time out of your day
to walk me through that customer issue. As the new hire, I sure needed some insight from an expert. I feel much less overwhelmed by the job now”
IMPORTANCE OF OUR WORLDVIEWS
Composite of values, beliefs, and attitudes we hold toward the world
Taken-for-granted nature They underlie most intractable issues They blind the participants to alternative views Effect what we observe, how we explain and
describe what we observe, and what we believe we should do What is normal, right, wrong? What are people, what is the nature of nature? What is time? How should we live, get what we need? How important are our groups, and in what way? Is there a God? If so, how does that change things?
CHAPTER 16Creativity and Conflict
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Creativity: a process of making sense of some problem in a new way
Four stages of the creative process: The preparation stage: all previous learning and
any information you gather to address the problem
The incubation stage: period of thinking about the problem—giving it time to take shape and form
The illumination stage: when a particular idea appears in response to the problem
The verification stage: testing the creative response to substantiate the new idea
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Traits of Creative People Very few innate differences Courage: willing to risk failure
Allowing for multiple attempts as normal Expressiveness: be ourselves, not fear what (we
think) others think of us Humor: helps us put incongruous ideas together
and see new relationships Intuition: having faith in what we think is a good
idea and how we feel about those ideas. Listening to our “inner voices”
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Traits of Creative People Learning from successes, mistakes, and failures
Not hiding failures from our perception Having fun doing what we do
Involves finding fun: a perception, not an objective reality
Willing to ask others for help Not restricted by our pride
Confidently implementing decisions Without second-guessing ourselves
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Why is creativity important? More likely to develop mutually satisfying outcomes
in conflict situations Health issues
Effective, creative decisions require Searching for threats and opportunities in situations Identifying the causes of situations Evaluating the risks of the situation Applying intuition and emotion Taking multiple perspectives (genuinely) Considering the time frame for making the decision Working to solve the problem
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Misassumptions prevent creativity: Too success orientated due to fear of failure Valuing peer pressure and conformity to much Yielding to sanctions against critical exploration
Too much curiosity is disruptive Overemphasis on sex role Assuming “divergent behavior” is “abnormal”
Like the genius/madness assumption The work/play dichotomy—work is a burden; play
is an end in itself, unrelated to work
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Creativity can be learned Best if not domain-specific (e.g.: very general
approach, like brainstorming) Barriers to Creativity
Trained incapacities: when existing talents (good ones) and abilities limit our thinking Too task oriented/goal centered: when it blinds us to
the implications of the outcome: give them space to decide
Redefinition: if we rely only on what “sounds good” Critical thinking: when seen as an attack, or as
“argumentative” (or when it is argumentative) Using objective standards: when it mitigates flexibility,
or when we think of them as the “one right way”
CREATIVITY AS THINKING DIFFERENTLY
Vertical thinking: series of steps, completing one before the next
Lateral thinking: restructuring patterns (insights) and provoking new ones (creativity) Reversal: allow the outcome to drive the process Entry vs. attention area: shift the attention area
from entry point (usually the initiation stage) to other areas (e.g. the triggers, the history, etc.) Different perspectives at each attention area
Six Hats approach: requires one to ask questions from different vantage points
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
White Hat: information known or needed Who is involved, why, what are the issues, etc.
Red Hat: feelings, hunches, and intuition Focus on feelings about the conflict.
Yellow Hat: focus on values and beliefs Is solution consistent with the person you believe
you are (is it something to be proud of)? Black Hat: the devil’s advocate Green Hat: focus on creativity of viewpoints Blue Hat: macro approach
Are all angles conidered? Are there other ways of achieving the same goal? Is the goal worthwhile?
CREATIVITY AND CONFLICT
Consider mind-mapping process Mind-mapping: like brainstorming Non-linear: no start point Brainstorm conflict concepts, then connect them The visual “map” can lead to new insight
Consider visual journaling process Like a visual mind map, but more expressive Image-based response to conflict in our life Allow the free expression to reveal hidden
meaning
Recommended