16. Speak on the role of groups in an organizational conflict. Draft the guidelines for productive conflict management for an organization of your choice.

Most of us have been in groups in which tensions and conflict made us uncomfortable or blocked problem solving. It is hoped that most of us also have belonged to groups in which conflict contributed to new and better ways of doing things, ac­tually strengthening the group's ability to work together. Think for a moment about these experiences. What made the difference? How did you feel and behave in these different circumstances?

Group Members in Conflict

Conflict styles generally have been studied as specific to individuals. Tim Kuhn and Marshall Scott Poole (2000) provided an expansion of the individual approach when they considered conflict styles at the group level "as a typical interaction pattern a group enacts when mem­bers deal with oppositions and disagreements." Kuhn and Poole use the categories of avoidance, distributive, and integrative styles to access the effect of conflict styles on group decision-making effectiveness. Avoidance styles describe behavior that minimizes addressing the conflict. A distrib­utive style, much like the competitive style, uses a confrontational approach, with one party or group essentially giving in to another. The integrative approach is char­acterized by cooperative and collaborative behaviors to pursue mutually positive resolutions.

Group Conflict Management Processes

Group conflict is so important in organizations that a variety of processes for man­agement have become commonplace. These processes are typically described as ne­gotiation, bargaining, mediation, forcing, and arbitration.

Negotiation is a common process in groups. Generally speak­ing, negotiation can be understood as a broad process involving discussions between and among individuals who are interdepend­ent and need to come together for a decision or course of action.Groups negotiate procedures and issues with expected give-and-take among members. The negotiation process is frequently associated with the need to compromise effectively.

Bargaining is a more structured form of negotiation. Bargaining usually involves the presentation of fairly specific pro­posals for the purpose of achieving a working agreement on par­ticular issues. At budget time, groups may be asked to present very specific proposals for money. Representatives from each group may be asked to negotiate or bargain for fixed re­sources. In some cases the rules for these exchanges will be well defined, whereas in others the process is more open-ended. Regardless of the formality, bargaining is an established conflict resolution procedure in many organizations.

Mediation is another possible group conflict management process. In mediation a designated individual guides the negotia­tions or bargaining efforts of the groups in conflict. Mediation is used when negotiations are deadlocked or tensions so high that a designated leader is desirable. When mediation fails, the designated leader frequently has to rely on forcing or making a decision that the group must accept. Obviously, for mediation or forcing to be effective, the designated leader must have credibility with the op­posing factions and responsibility and authority appropriate to the task. Generally speaking, mediators are members of the group or organization involved in the process.

Finally, when negotiation, bargaining, or mediation fails, or­ganizations can manage group conflict with third-party arbitration. Arbitration usually involves an outside negotiator who resolves differences with formally established procedures, labor-management disputes have been subjects of arbitration, as have a variety of legally related cases. Arbitration frequently re­sults in ill will because of the forced nature of resolving the conflict.

Fortunately most of us will work in groups that manage conflict through collaboration and negotiation. We know from experience that effectiveness is more likely to occur when group members voluntarily solve their own disputes than when leaders or an outside individual takes charge.

GUIDELINES FOR PRODUCTIVE CONFLICT

The following guidelines are presented to help you think about your personal par­ticipation in conflict. As you read, consider how each of the guidelines relates to your recent experiences during conflict and what guidelines you might add.

Monitor your personal behavior and the behavior of others for signs of de­structive conflict. What are you and others doing to contribute to destructive conflict? Folger, Poole, and Stutman (1993) identified symptoms of escalation or avoidance cycles. Avoidance behaviors include marked decrease in commitment to solving the problem; quick acceptance of a suggested solution; avoidance of raising controversial aspects of any issue; people stop listening; discussion stays on safe as­pects of the issue; little new information is exchanged; no plans are made to imple­ment solutions; and evidence for claims or positions is not challenged. Escalation behaviors include dogmatically arguing for the same position; taking longer than anticipated to deal with issues; threats used to win arguments; mounting tension; nothing being solved despite hard work; hostile nonverbal communication; sarcas­tic behavior to relieve tension; and arguments over trivial issues. Consider these be­haviors and other pertinent situations as you monitor your own experiences,

Identify common goals and interests between people or in groups. Try to think about problems in terms of common interests and goals. Avoid thinking about concrete positions and focus on common needs, desires, concerns, or fears. In organizations, legitimate and constructive disagreement often occurs about ways to implement solutions or to achieve goals. Identifying common interests and goals helps people avoid blaming and identifying othet people as the problem. When people are the problem, it is important to learn to deal directly with the in­dividual or individuals involved and not let "people conflict" contribute to poor organizational decisions.

Develop norms to work on problems. Norms or rules of behavior during a prob­lem discussion can contribute to productive conflict by assisting individuals to iden­tify how they will work on the problems with behaviors likely to facilitate informed decisions. Frequently adopted norms include (1) everyone in the group being respon­sible for assisting everyone else in presenting individual opinions; (2) avoiding win/lose statements; (3) avoiding suppression of differences by using procedures such as voting, averaging, and formal rules; (4) avoiding quick solutions; (5) making decisions only after alternative perspectives have been discussed; and (6) supporting differences of opinion and valuing diverse contributions for effectiveness.

Focus on mutual gain. Identify what everyone has to gain from productively solving the conflict. State how everyone can benefit from working on the problem.

Test proposed ideas against the criteria of mutual gain. Effective conflict resolution is more likely if opposing parties can see how their interests are protected. Avoid I thinking that there is only one right answer and that if the opposing party benefits, roil must therefore lose or not benefit. Develop the habit of thinking creatively in terms of mutual gain.

A Process for Productive Conflict

Individuals who observe or participate in productive conflicts frequently character­ize them as good problem-solving processes. Indeed, that is exactly what produc­tive conflict is.

The Process

Self-Analysis of the Issues. When we experience perceived and felt conflict, the time is right to do an in-depth self-analysis about the problem. Can we describe the conflict in terms that represent observable behaviors or events to all parties? What are the limits of our understanding of the problem? What types of solutions can we propose? Who needs to change or make a decision? What can we support in reso­lution strategies, and what types of results are clearly not acceptable? Also, what are the power issues, roles, and relationships of the parties involved? Finally, what are our personal responsibilities for this conflict?

Setting a Meeting to Work on the Problem. Productive conflict occurs in a climate in which all participants feel supported. The setting of the meeting beforehand and the environment of the meeting itself are critical to this supportive climate. Generally speaking, all parties involved in conflict should be notified in advance about the issue for discussion. Although that will sometimes produce anticipation stress, mental preparation can occur only when everyone knows the agenda. Also, the emotional impact of conflict can be lessened and trust levels increased when people don't feel surprised by a conflict. Commitment to agreements is greater if parties have time to think about the problem and their input and limits. In addi­tion, the meeting environment should be conducive to the free exchange of ideas, usually private and on relatively neutral ground. Individuals using the power posi­tion of their private offices may actually inhibit real problem solving. Finally, ade­quate time for full discussion should be allotted, with the timing of the meeting as convenient as possible for all participants.

Defining the Problem. Effective conflict outcomes occur in solving the basic prob­lem rather than finding solutions to surface issues or discovering vastly different descriptions of the problem. Conflict participants should be encouraged to define the problem fully before any discussion of solution strategies. Problems often are poorly described because of underlying tension in the setting and a desire to get the confrontation over with as soon as possible. Clarification of the problem—through self-disclosure and active questioning—is essential to productive problem solving.

Developing Solutions. We are often relieved to be "getting through this problem" and neglect to look comprehensively at approaches and solutions. In the develop­ment of solutions it is important to think broadly about all alternatives, even those that seem to have little immediate merit. Better and longer-lasting solutions will emerge from broad rather than narrow perspectives of alternatives. All conflict participants should be encouraged to participate in solution generation.

Narrowing the Choices for Action. Decisions should be discussed in light of the de­fined problem issues. Often decisions made with broad agreement fail because the participants have not linked their intended actions to the actual problem. If behav­ior change is required on the part of some but not all participants, particular care should be taken that the affected individuals participate in narrowing the choices for action. They should be encouraged to select options to which they can commit, although these options can be rejected by others if they do not meet acceptable standards.

Committing to Solutions. Agreeing on a solution or approach to the problem should occur only after the parties assess how that solution addresses the identified problem, whether individuals can support the decision, if those most affected have participated in the decision, and whether the solution is workable and can be im­plemented. Commitment to the solution comes through developing an implemen­tation plan. Who is going to do what and in what time frame? How is the solution going to be evaluated? Is everyone clear about what we think this solution will ac­complish and also what it cannot do? Finally, can we predict from this experience whether we have a solution that will work? If so, what were the keys to this out­come? If not, what were the barriers we could not surmount?

Monitoring the Process. A real key to long-term conflict resolution is effective im­plementation of agreed-on solutions. Effective conflict outcomes are encouraged when participants establish how they will monitor the implementation plan and when they will meet again to assess how it is working. This follow-up builds ac­countability into the process and also allows for celebration when solutions work and meet problem needs. This closure on the process also establishes a framework for revisiting an issue fot which the solution—even if faithfully implemented—still does not satisfy the real needs of the conflict.

Although no process, set of skills, or body of knowledge will free individuals, groups, or entire organizations from the reality of conflict, the knowledge, sensitiv­ities, skills, and values of conflict participants directly influence the productivity of conflict outcomes. Effective organizational communicators know they bear re­sponsibilities to monitor continually their own abilities and support that process for others. In particular, productive conflicts help individuals improve their organi­zational relationships and are an important organizational mechanism for good decision making and adaptation to change.

17. Speak on the factors and methods that influence decision making and problem solving processes. Speak on the methods of decision making and problem solving most frequently used in your organization.

Decision making and problem solving are among the most important communication processes in organizations. People working together to identify needed changes contribute to innovation and creativity. Groups or individuals who cannot make a decision potentially retard progress or, even worse, contribute to negative organizational outcomes. Decision making and problem solving occur through a variety of communication processes. The effectiveness of decision making and problem solving directly influences the effectiveness of individuals as well as entire organizations. Decision making is the process of choosing from among several alternatives, whereas problem solving is a multistage process of moving an issue, situation, or state from an undesirable to a more desirable condition. Although problem solving includes decision making, decision making and problem solving are not one and the same process. Decision making depends on individuals and groups choosing from among known alternatives. Problem solving is the process by which individuals and groups generate alternatives and evaluate those alterna­tives in light of the identified problem.

Joan Murphy engages in both individual and group decision making and prob­lem solving. Joan and her coworkers have alternatives to consider as well as sales problems to understand and correct. The decision-making and problem-solving processes in which they engage require risks. These risks ultimately contribute to the effectiveness of Dayton Retailers.

All decision making and problem solving involve a level of risk. Decisions, whether as choices from among well-defined alternatives or the result of complex problem solving, reflect desired courses of action before the results of the action are known. Unknown results represent risk. The level of risk relates to the importance of the decision: more risk generally is associated with more important deci­sions. In other words, the more that can go right with a good decision is weighed against the more that can go wrong if the decision fails.

Joan Murphy faces a high-risk situation as she moves to the Glencrest store. Sales are down and the manager she replaces was popular with her employees. If Joan is successful, the store will have an increase in sales and Dayton management will view her efforts favorably. Joan has a lot to gain, and so does Dayton. If her de­cision-making and problem-solving efforts are ineffective, the store faces staff and merchandise reductions and Joan's own career may be damaged. A good decision­making process will not guarantee success, but a poor process will almost certainly contribute to failure. Thus, both individual and group decision-making and problem-solving capabilities influence personal and organizational effectiveness.

METHODS FOR DECISION MAKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING

Influenced by culture, the issue at hand, and communication and technical compe­tencies, organizational members choose from among a variety of methods and processes for decision making and problem solving. We describe the following meth­ods – individual approach, leader mandate, majority rule, powerful minority, and consensus – to illustrate the diversity of options available for individuals, groups, or entire organizations. It is important to note in the twenty-first century, the emphasis on decision making and problem solving is rapidly shifting from an individual to a group or team responsibility. The emphasis on group/team problem solving and de­cision making increasingly asks those who will actually implement a decision to make the decision. In the past, managers characteristically made decisions which were carried out at least one organizational level removed from the manager.