World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Organizational conflict

Article Id: WHEBN0015206066
Reproduction Date:

Title: Organizational conflict  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Collection: Conflict, Dispute Resolution, Industrial Relations, Management, Organizational Conflict, Social Psychology
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Organizational conflict

Organizational conflict, or workplace conflict, is a state of discord caused by the actual or perceived opposition of individuals, departments, and between unions and management. There are subtler forms of conflict involving rivalries, jealousies, personality clashes, role definitions, and struggles for power and favor. There is also conflict within individuals – between competing needs and demands – to which individuals respond in different ways.[1]


  • Types of conflict 1
    • Personal conflict 1.1
    • Intragroup conflict 1.2
    • Intergroup conflict 1.3
  • Causes 2
    • Role conflict 2.1
    • Passive aggressive behavior 2.2
    • Office romance 2.3
  • Consequences 3
    • Stress 3.1
    • Positive outcomes 3.2
  • Resolution 4
    • Conflict management 4.1
    • Counseling 4.2
    • Change 4.3
  • See also 5
  • References 6

Types of conflict

Conflict affecting organizations can occur in resolution of such conflicts can most often be achieved through a rational process of problem solving, coupled with a willingness to explore issues and alternatives and to listen to each other.[1]

Personal conflict

A person conflict involves a conflict between two people, most often from a mutual dislike or personality clash.[2] According to Boston University FSAO, "Causes for workplace conflict can be personality or style differences and personal problems such as substance abuse, childcare issues, and family problems. Organizational factors such as leadership, management, budget, and disagreement about core values can also contribute." [3] University of Colorado–Boulder cites as primary causes of workplace conflict poor communication, different values, differing interests, scarce resources, personality clashes, and poor performance.[4]

Many difficulties in this area are beyond the scope of

  1. ^ a b c d e f
  2. ^
  3. ^
  4. ^ Resolving Workplace Conflict, University of Colorado–Boulder.
  5. ^ Party-Directed Mediation: Facilitating Dialogue Between Individuals (on-line 3rd Edition, 2014) by Gregorio Billikopf, University of California
  6. ^ a b
  7. ^ a b c
  8. ^ a b c
  9. ^ a b c d
  10. ^ a b
  11. ^ De Angelis, Paula: Blindsided: Recognizing and Dealing with Passive-Aggressive Leadership in the Workplace, (Kindle Edition - Jun 22,2008)
  12. ^ Dangerous love: An Office romance could cost you your job, Julie N. Lynem, San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 14, 2003.
  13. ^ When an Office Romance Sours,
  14. ^ Workplace Coach: Companies pay the price when managers avoid dealing with conflict, Maureen, Moriarty, Seattlepi, Oct. 28, 2007.
  15. ^ Keenan, A., & Newton, T. (1985). Stressful events, stressors and psychological strains in young professional engineers. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 6(2), 151-156.
  16. ^ Liu, C., Spector, P. E., & Shi, L. (2007). Cross-National Job Stress: A Quantitative and Qualitative Study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(2), 209-239.
  17. ^ a b Bowling, N. A., & Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim's perspective: A theoretical model and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 998-1012.
  18. ^ [1] Conflict and dispute management system design: overview.
  19. ^ Conflict Management, FAO Corporate Document Repository.
  20. ^ Party-Directed Mediation: Facilitating Dialogue Between Individuals (on-line 3rd Edition, 2014) by Gregorio Billikopf, University of California
  21. ^
  22. ^


See also

[22] Management is presumed to be guided by a vision of the future. The manager reflects in their decision-making activities the values of the organization as they have developed through time, from the original founder-owner to the present top-management personnel. In navigating a path between the values of the organization and its objectives and goals, management has expectations concerning the organization's effectiveness and efficiency and frequently initiates changes within the organization. On other occasions, changes in the external environment —


A trained conflict resolver can begin with an economical intervention, such as getting group members to clarify and reaffirm shared goals. If necessary, they move through a systematic series of interventions, such as testing the members' ability and willingness to compromise; resorting to confrontation, enforced counseling, and/or termination as last resorts.[21]

When personal conflict leads to frustration and loss of [10] 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 their work adversely. The nondirective approach is one effective way for managers to deal with frustrated subordinates and co-workers. There are 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.[1]


Workplace conflict may include disputes between peers, supervisor-subordinate conflict or intergroup disputes. When disputes are not dealt with in a timely manner, greater efforts may be needed to solve them. Party-Directed Mediation (PDM) is a mediation approach particularly suited for disputes between colleagues or peers, especially those based on deep-seated interpersonal conflict or multicultural or multiethnic ones. 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 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.[20]

Constantino helps organizations design their own, ad hoc human resources department, whose tasks include providing confidential advice to internal "customers" in relation to problems at work. This could be seen as less risky than asking one's manager for help. HR departments may also provide an impartial person who can mediate disputes and provide an objective point of view. Another option is the introduction of the Ombudsman figure at the organizational level: charged with surveying common causes of conflict and suggesting structural improvements to address them.

Conflict management


Intergroup conflict between groups is a sometimes necessary, sometimes destructive, event that occurs at all levels and across all functions in goals, such as competition between sales districts for the highest sales.[8] Intergroup conflict is destructive when it alienates groups that should be working together, when it results in win-lose competition, and when it leads to compromises that represent less-than-optimum outcomes.

True interdependence among members leads automatically to conflict resolution in the group. Interdependence recognizes that differences will exist and that they can be helpful. Hence, members learn to accept ideas from dissenters (which does not imply agreeing with them), they learn to listen and to value openness, and they learn to share a mutual problem-solving attitude to ensure the exploration of all facets of a problem facing the group.[9]

Group conflict does not always lead to negative consequences. The presence of a dissenting member or subgroup often results in more penetration of the group's problem and more creative solutions. This is because disagreement forces the members to think harder in an attempt to cope with what may be valid objections to general group opinion. But the group must know how to deal with differences that may arise.[6]

Positive outcomes

[17].job satisfaction, depression, physical symptoms, and low levels of anxiety. It also relates to strains such as workload, role ambiguity, and role conflict It relates to other stressors that might co-occur, such as [17] Conflict has been noted to be an indicator of the broader concept of workplace harassment.[16][15] Interpersonal conflict among people at work has been shown to be one of the most frequently noted stressors for employees.


Conflict is not always destructive. When it is destructive, however, managers need to understand and do something about it. A rational process for dealing with the conflict should be programmed. Such a process should include a planned action response on the part of the manager or the organization, rather than relying on a simple reaction or a change that occurs without specific action by management.[1]

  • Divert time and energy from the main issues
  • Delay decisions
  • Create deadlocks
  • Drive unaggressive committee members to the sidelines
  • Interfere with listening
  • Obstruct exploration of more alternatives
  • Decrease or destroy sensitivity
  • Cause members to drop out or resign from committees
  • Arouse anger that disrupts a meeting
  • Interfere with empathy
  • Incline underdogs to sabotage
  • Provoke personal abuse
  • Cause defensiveness

The win-lose conflict in groups may have some of the following negative effects:[9]

Unresolved conflict in the workplace has been linked to miscommunication resulting from confusion or refusal to cooperate, quality problems, missed deadlines or delays, increased stress among employees, reduced creative collaboration and team problem solving, disruption to work flow, decreased customer satisfaction, distrust, split camps, and gossip.[14]


[13] can make co-workers uncomfortable and accusations of favoritism may occur, especially if it is a supervisor-subordinate relationship. If the relationship goes awry, one party may seek to exact revenge on the other.Public displays of affection [12] Office romances can be a cause of workplace conflict. 96 percent of human resource professionals and 80 percent of executives said workplace romances are dangerous because they can lead to conflict within the organization.

Office romance

[11] Passive aggressive behavior is a common response from workers and managers which is particularly noxious to team unity and productivity. In workers, it can lead to sabotage of projects and the creation of a hostile environment. In managers, it can end up stifling a team's creativity. De Angelis says "It would actually make perfect sense that those promoted to leadership positions might often be those who on the surface appear to be agreeable, diplomatic and supportive, yet who are actually dishonest, backstabbing saboteurs behind the scenes."

Passive aggressive behavior

These and other varieties of role conflict tend to increase an individual's anxiety and frustration. Sometimes they motivate him to do more and better work. Other times they can lead to frustration and reduced efficiency.[10]

As a consequence, there exist opportunities for role conflict as the various roles interact with one another. Other types of role conflict occur when an individual receives inconsistent demands from another person; for example, they are asked to serve on several time-consuming committees at the same time that they are urged to get out more production in their work unit. Another kind of role strain takes place when the individual finds that they are expected to meet the opposing demands of two or more separate members of the organization. Such a case would be that of a worker who finds himself pressured by their boss to improve the quality of their work while their work group wants more production in order to receive a higher bonus share.

[8] One facet of personal conflict includes the multiple roles people play in organizations.

Role conflict


[7] None of these outcomes is a happy one. Disputes settled on the basis of power, such as through a strike or a lockout in a labor-management dispute, are often deeply resented by the loser. Such settlements may be resisted and the winner defeated in underground ways that are difficult to detect and to counter. When this happens, neither side wins; both are losers. If the conflict is left unresolved, as when both sides withdraw from the scene, intergroup cooperation and effectiveness may be seriously impaired to the detriment of the entire

It is easy to see that under the conditions described above, mutual solutions to problems cannot be achieved. As a result, the side having the greater power wins; the other side loses. Or the conflict may go unresolved, and undesirable conditions or circumstances continue. Or the conflict may be settled by a higher authority.[9]

In addition, each group tends to distort both its own views and those of the competing group. What is perceived as "good" in one's own position is emphasized, what is "bad" is ignored; the position of the other group is assessed as uniformly "bad," with little "good" to be acknowledged or accepted. Thus, the judgment and objectivity of both groups are impaired. When such groups meet to "discuss" their differences, constructive, rational behavior is severely inhibited.[9] Each side phrases its questions and answers in a way that strengthens its own position and disparages the other's. Hostility between the two groups increases; mutual understandings are buried in negative stereotypes.

Certain activities and attitudes are typical in groups involved in a win-lose conflict. Each side closes ranks and prepares itself for battle. Members show increased loyalty and support for their own groups. Minor differences between group members tend to be smoothed over, and deviants are dealt with harshly. The level of morale in the groups increases and infuses everyone with competitive spirit. The power structure becomes better defined, as the "real" leaders come to the surface and members rally around the "best" thinkers and talkers.[7]

Intergroup conflict occurs in two general forms. Horizontal strain involves competition between functions, for example, sales versus production, research and development versus engineering, purchasing versus legal, line versus staff, and so on. Vertical strain involves competition between hierarchical levels, for example, union versus management, foremen versus middle management, shop workers versus foremen.[8] A struggle between a group of employees and management is an example of vertical strain or conflict. A clash between a sales department and production over inventory policy would be an example of horizontal strain.

Intergroup conflict

In western culture, winning is more acceptable than losing, and competition is more prevalent than cooperation, all of which tends to intensify intragroup conflict. Group meetings are often conducted in a win-lose climate — that is, individual or subgroup interaction is conducted for the purpose of determining a winner and a loser rather than for achieving mutual problem solving.[1]

Conflict arises in groups because of the scarcity of freedom, position, and resources. People who value independence tend to resist the need for interdependence and, to some extent, conformity within a group. People who seek power therefore struggle with others for position or status within the group. Rewards and recognition are often perceived as insufficient and improperly distributed, and members are inclined to compete with each other for these prizes.[7]

Intragroup conflict

It was pointed out that there is a basic incompatibility between the authority and structure of formal organizations and the human personality. Human behavior cannot be separated from the culture that surrounds it.[6]


This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.