Page 2 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

Managing Organizational Conflict

Dr. Mitali PATHAK

Faculty, Board of Studies
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, New Delhi
E-mail: mitalikhosla[at]yahoo[dot]co[dot]in

Abstract: The concept of conflict, being an outcome of behaviours, is

an integral part of human life. Wherever there is a difference
of opinion there are chances of conflict. Managing conflict
effectively demands multifarious professional abilities and
acumen. To resolve and manage conflict, the organisations
must understand the causes, theories, approaches and
strategies of conflict management. Conflict and stress are
interlinked as they are dependent on each other. It is a
psychological phenomenon that requires a high level of
attention and thorough understanding. It appears that there
is a very little margin to remain unaffected from the clutches
of stress in contemporary time.

Keywords: conflict, stress, management, organization, strategy.

Introduction
Conflict in the workplace can be incredibly destructive to good
teamwork. Managed in the wrong way, real and legitimate differences
between people can quickly spiral out of control, resulting in situations
where co-operation breaks down and the team's mission is threatened.
This is particularly the case where the wrong approaches to conflict
resolution are used. Stress is basically the impact of one object on
Page 3 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

another. There are three terms which are used synonymously to denote
this phenomenon: stress, strain, and pressure, however, there are thin
differences in these terms. The amount of stress an event will cause in an
individual will depend on the way that individual thinks about or
appraises the event. If there's conflict in your workplace it's normal - but
it's not easy. Conflict is identified over and over as a major cause of
workplace stress. Unresolved conflict is the computer virus of the
workplace. In an organization an early symptom is a drop in productivity.
The need of the hour in front of the organization is to back up and look at
own thoughts and to resolve conflict. It is observed that numerous
studies have been attempted to understand the nuances of conflict
management.

Nature and Scope of Stress and Conflict

Sociological studies have shifted from the notion of power as a
source of conflict to the impact conflict has on workplace stress and the
resultant levels of productivity. Schuler’s definition (1980 cited in Arnold,
et al. 1998) is one that is frequently adopted: “stress is a dynamic
condition in which an individual is confronted with an opportunity,
constraint or demand related to what they desire and for which the
outcome is perceived to both uncertain and important”. With regard to
sources of stress, researchers have identified different aspects of a
person's work environment, which have been implicated as sources of
potential stress. Researchers have, for instance, found that high levels of
role ambiguity (extent of a person's uncertainty about aspects of his or
her job, including priorities, expectations, etc.) and role conflict (the
degree to which the job is characterized by conflicting demands) are
associated with low levels of job satisfaction and poor mental health
(Ross, 1995).

An additional source of stress in the work environment is work

Page 4 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

overload. Several studies have shown that perceptions of work overload

have significant negative relationships with measures of job satisfaction
and more general measures of wellbeing (Caplan, et al. 1975; Parkes,
1991). There is also evidence to suggest that if one’s abilities and
knowledge are not being utilized, it can result in another source of stress.
Caplan, et al. (1975), for instance, found that under-utilization of skills
was associated with high levels of both job-related boredom and job
dissatisfaction, while other studies have linked under utilization to
psychological strain and depression (Orpen and King, 1986). It is due to
all the stress dimensions which give finally raise to the conflicts (Ganster,
et al. 1986).

While conflict is inevitable in groups and organizations due to the

complexity and interdependence of organizational life, theorists have
differed about whether it is harmful or beneficial to organizations. Early
organizational conflict theorists suggested that conflict was detrimental to
organizational productivity (Pondy, 1967; Brown, 1983). It focused much
of their attention on the causes and resolution of conflict (Schmidt and
Kochan, 1972; Brett, 1984).

The research findings have shown that conflict is associated with

reduced productivity and dissatisfaction in groups (Gladstein, 1984; Wall
and Nolan, 1986) and that the absence of strife within top management
teams and decision-making groups is related to increased performance at
the group and organizational levels.

In contrast, some sociologists have theorized that conflict is

beneficial under some circumstances (Tjosvold, 1991; Van de and De
Dreu, 1994). There are evidence which has demonstrated that conflict
within teams improves decision, quality and strategic planning, financial
performance, and organizational growth (Eisenhardt and Schoonhoven,
1990).
Page 5 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

Psychological Dimensions of Stress and Conflict

Research on communication, group interaction processes, and
diversity in groups and organizations has also indicated that conflict can
be beneficial as well as detrimental (Wagner, et al. 1984; Eisenhardt and
Schoonhoven, 1990). From a psychological perspective, the investigation
of stress in the workplace supports this dialectic. Stress is not necessarily
the result of work demands, being anxious or having a heavy workload.
Stress can be the result of a lack of fit between a person (in terms of
their personality, aptitudes and abilities) and the environment, and a
consequent inability to cope effectively with the various demands.

Although, mainly considered as an adverse condition, psychologists

do not always consider stress a negative function. Selye (1976) cited in
Simmons and Nelson, 2001) distinguished between eustress (a pleasant
experience, a culmination of a superior physical/mental effort) and
distress. Stress in any context is usually associated with constraints and
demands. He identifies that two conditions are necessary to the
translation of potential stress into actual stress which involves 1)
uncertainty over the outcome and 2) importance attached to the
outcome. Robbins, et al. (1998) describes this relationship thus:
regardless of the conditions, it’s only when there is doubt or uncertainty
about whether the opportunity will be seized, the constraint removed, or
the loss avoided that there is stress. That is, stress is highest for those
individuals who perceive that they are uncertain as to whether they will
win or lose and lowest for those individuals who think that winning or
losing is a certainty. But importance is also critical. If winning or losing is
an unimportant outcome, there is no stress.

Robbins et al. (1998) classified a number of factors relevant to

stress as either potential sources of stress and consequences of stress.
However, differences in individual and organizational factors in the form
of management style act as filters to both the experience of stress and
the consequences of stress. Central to this line of argument is that
Page 6 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

people with different dispositions tend to create different social

environments for themselves. Thus, a person’s “situation” depends not
only on external conditions, but also on his or her own approach to
people and problems.

Conflict Management Strategies resolving Conflicts in a

Planned Manner
Organizational factors with the potential to cause stress include:
work overload; pressures that are placed upon the worker to avoid errors
or complete tasks in a limited period; or demanding/insensitive superior.
These stressful factors can stem from: task demands (issues often of a
work organization nature related to an individual’s job); role demands
(pressures placed on an individual relative to the role/function they play
in an organization); interpersonal demands (pressures/difficulties caused
by work and related relationships with other employees); organizational
structure (level of hierarchy, the effectiveness of the structure in
facilitating work relations/performance); organizational life stage
(different pressures emerge in the four stages of the organizational life
cycle establishment, growth, maturity, decline); and organizational
leadership (managerial style/relations of the organization).

Conflict management styles can then have an all-encompassing

effect on work life in organizations, by impacting the degree to which an
employee experiences ongoing conflict. Therefore, a number of scholars
have developed typologies of conflict management styles using the
conceptual foundation provided by Blake and Mouton’s (1964) managerial
grid. The two dimensions have been labeled “desire to satisfy one’s own
concern” and “desire to satisfy other's concern” (Thomas, 1976 cited in
rahim,1983), or “concern for self” and “concern for other” (Rahim and
Bonoma, 1979). A person’s conflict style is said to incorporate both
dimensions in varying degrees. The High concern for both self and other
Page 7 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

defines a “collaborating” or “integrating” style, while low concern for both

self and other defines an “avoiding” style. High concern for self, but low
concern for other describes a “competing” or “dominating” style. A low
concern for self, but high concern for other describes an
“accommodating” or “obliging” style. Along with conflict management
styles, the organization's ability to maintain coherent and integrated
production through organizational norms also serves as a filter to
negative stress (Roethlisberger and Dickson 1939; Dunlop 1958).
Organizational norms specify that management is responsible for
maintaining a coherent and effective system of production that allows
employees to meet the demands of their jobs (Whitener, et al. 1998).
Coherent organizational procedures are essential for organizational
effectiveness (Bass, 1985). Researchers in the area of organizational
coherence and integration point to a number of positive consequences
(Moore, 1962; Smith, 2001). These include increased citizenship on the
part of employees and the creation of a more cooperative and less
conflicting workplace (Pfeffer, 1998). Hence, organizational coherence
can play a prominent role in mitigating both formal and informal worker
resistance. If organizational coherence and integration are missing,
employees may define management as illegitimate (Halaby, 1986).
Employees also may feel that their individual and collective interests in
secure and stable work are threatened (Hodson, 2001). As a result,
stress levels increase to a negative state.

It has been widely established that the conflict management

strategies of the executives has a definite impact on the work
performance of the individuals. However, conflict management strategies
adopted by the executives help in reducing their stress levels. But, as to
what strategy should be adopted by an individual at a particular stress
level is a matter of concern. Crampton, et al. (1995) have emphasized
that stress is found in all aspects of life. Hans Selye, a pioneer in stress
research, has defined stress as “the nonspecific response of the body to
any demands made upon it”. It is considered to be an internal state or
Page 8 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

reaction to anything we consciously or unconsciously perceive as a

threat, either real or imagined Clarke (1988). Stress can evoke feelings
of frustration, fear, conflict, pressure, hurt, anger, sadness, inadequacy,
guilt, loneliness, or confusion Cavanagh (1988). Individuals feel stressed
when they are fired or lose a loved one (negative stress) as well as when
they are promoted or go on a vacation (positive stress). While many
individuals believe they must avoid stress to live longer. It is rightly said
that it is the salt and spice of life and that to have no stress we would
have to be dead person.

In this difficult economy, one may find it harder than ever to cope
with challenges on the job. Both the stress we take with us when we go
to work and the stress that awaits us on the job are on the rise-and
employers, managers, and workers all feel the added pressure. While
some stress is a normal part of life, excessive stress interferes with the
productivity and reduces the physical and emotional health, so it’s
important to find ways to keep it under control. Fortunately, there is a lot
that one can do to manage and reduce stress at work. Segal, et al.
(2008), in their study highlighted that the troubled economy may feel
like an emotional roller coaster. “Layoffs” and “budget cuts” have become
bywords in the workplace, and the result is increased fear, uncertainty,
and higher levels of stress. Since job and workplace stress grow in times
of economic crisis, it’s important to learn new and better ways of coping
with the pressure. The ability to manage stress in the workplace can
make the difference between success and failure on the job. The
emotions are contagious, and stress has an impact on the quality of your
interactions with others.

The better an employee is managing the stress, there will be more

positive affect those around and the less other people’s stress will have a
negative affect. In order to assist managers in understanding conflict, a
number of factors regarding individuals and organizations have been
identified. Differences in individual characteristics have been shown to
Page 9 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

impact the development of conflict and its potential resolution. Eaton and
Bradley (2008) promulgated that individual differences in stress may
arise from many sources and the role of gender is one of them where it is
generally seen that women endorsed the use of emotion-focused coping
strategies more than men, even when perceived stressfulness was
controlled.

Conclusions
Conflict in workplace communication also causes employees
experience the stress. Workplace communication, like any
communication, is basic to the interaction and subsequent performance
of the participants. “Workplace communication is different from social
communication due to the contrived hierarchy one finds in the workplace.
One communicates in the workplace with employees who are in
subordinate positions as well as with those who occupy equal or superior
positions within the company. Each type of communication requires
different levels of formality. Like any form of communication, workplace
communication has differing styles. Styles of communication, coupled
with the workplace hierarchy, create and increase the stress levels.
Finally, workplace diversity leads to communication problems and stress.
As the workplace becomes more diversified, methods of communication
must become more precise.

References
[1] Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and Performance beyond
Expectations, New York: Free Press.

[2] Blake, R. R. and Mouton, J. S. (1964). The Managerial Grid: Key

Orientations for Achieving Production through People, Houston,
TX: Gulf.
Page 10 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

[3] Brett, J.M. (1984). “Managing Organizational Conflict”,

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 15, No.1,
pp. 644-678.

[4] Brown, L. (1983). Managing Conflict at Organizational

Interfaces, Reading: Addison-Wesley

[5] Dunlop, J. (1958). Industrial Relations Systems, Carbondale:

Southern Illinois University Press.

[6] Eisenhardt, K. and Schoonhoven, C. (1990). “Organizational

Growth: Linking Founding Team, Strategy, Environment, and
Growth among U.S. Semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, No.1, pp. 504-529.

[7] Gladstein, D. (1984). “A Model of Task Group Effectiveness”,

Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, No.1, pp. 499-517.

[8] Houston, B. K. (1981). “Psycho physiological Responsivity and

the Type A Behavior Pattern”, Journal of Research in
Personality, Vol.17, pp. 22-39.

[9] Matthews, K. A. and Brunson, B. I. (1979). “Allocation of

Attention and the Type A Coronary-Prone Behavior Pattern”,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.37, pp. 2081-
2090.

[10] Moore, W. (1962). The Conduct of the Corporation, New York:

Random House.

[11] Pfeffer, J. (1998). The Human Equation: Building Profits by

Putting People First, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

[12] Pondy, I. (1967). “Organizational Conflict”, Administrative

Science Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 296-320.

[13] Rahim, M. Afzalur and T. V. Bonoma (1979), “Managing

Page 11 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

Organizational Conflict: A Model for Diagnosis and

Intervention,” Psychological Reports, Vol.44, pp. 1323-
1344.

[14] Rahim, M.A.(1983). Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventories,

Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

[15] Robbins, S., Millett, B., Cacioppe, R. and Waters-March, T.

(1998). Organisational Behaviour: Leading and Managing in
Australia and New Zealand, Sydney: Prentice Hall.

[16] Roethlisberger, F. and Dickson, W. (1939). Management and

the Worker, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

[17] Schmidt, S. and Kochan, T. (1972). “Conflict: Toward

Conceptual Clarity”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17,
No. 3, pp. 359-370.

[18] Smith, T. W. and Anderson, N. B. (1986). “Models of Personality

and Disease: An Interactional Approach to Type A Behaviour
and Cardiovascular Risk”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol.50, pp. 1166-1173.

[19] Smith, V. (2001). Crossing the Great Divide: Worker Risk and
Opportunity in the New Economy, Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.

[20] Steffy, B. and Jones, J. (1990). “Differences between Full-Time

and Part-Time Employees in Perceived Role Strain and Work
Satisfaction’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol.11, No.4,
pp. 321-330

[21] Tjosvold, D. (1991). “Rights and Responsibilities of Dissent: Co

operative Conflict”, Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, Vol.4, No.1, pp. 13 -23.

[22] Van De Vliert, E. and De Dreu, C.W.K. (1994). “Optimizing

Page 12 Oeconomics of Knowledge, Volume 2, Issue 4, 4Q 2010

Performance by Conflict Stimulation”, International Journal of

Conflict Management, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 211.

[23] Wagner, G.W., Jeffrey, P. and Charles, O. (1984).

“Organizational Demography and Turnover in Top-Management
Groups”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.29, pp. 74-92.

[24] Wall, V. and Nolan, L. (1986). “Perceptions of Inequity,

Satisfaction, and Conflict in Task-Oriented Groups”, Human
Relations, Vol. 39, No, 4, pp. 1033-1052.

[25] Watson, D. and Hubbard, B. (1996). “Adaptational Style and

Dispositional Structure: Coping in the Context of the Five-Factor
Model”, Journal of Personality, Vol.64, pp.737-774.

[26] Weidner, G. and Matthews, K. A. (1978). “Reported Physical

Symptoms Elicited by Unpredictable Events and the Type A
Coronary-Prone Behavior Pattern”, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, Vol.36, pp. 1213-1220.

[27] Whitener, E., Brodt, S., Korsgaard, M. and Werner, J. (1998).

“Managers as Initiators of Trust: An Exchange Relationship
Framework for Understanding Managerial Trustworthy
Behavior”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.
513-530.