UNIT-4 POWER AND POLITICS

WHAT IS POWER
In an organizational context, power can be defined as the ability or
capacity of an individual or a group to influence or control the
behavior, actions, and decisions of others. Power dynamics are
prevalent in all types of organizations, from hierarchical structures
like corporations to more egalitarian settings like nonprofits.
Here are five characteristics of power within organizations:
1. Authority: Power often comes from formal positions within the
organizational hierarchy. Those in higher positions typically
have more authority and thus more power to make decisions,
allocate resources, and influence the direction of the
organization.
2. Control of Resources: Power can stem from control over
valuable resources such as finances, information, technology, or
human capital. Those who control these resources often wield
significant influence over others within the organization.
3. Influence: Power manifests through the ability to persuade or
manipulate others to act in accordance with one's wishes or
interests. Influential individuals can shape opinions, decisions,
and outcomes within the organization without necessarily
holding formal authority.
4. Networks and Relationships: Power can also be derived from
one's network of relationships and alliances within the
organization. Individuals with strong connections to key
stakeholders or decision-makers may have greater access to
opportunities, information, and support, enhancing their power
base.
5. Expertise and Knowledge: Power can be derived from
possessing specialized skills, knowledge, or expertise that are
valued within the organization. Those who are recognized as
 experts in their field often command respect and influence, even
if they lack formal authority.

WHAT IS AUTHORITY

In an organizational context, authority refers to the legitimate

power or right granted to individuals or positions within the
hierarchy to make decisions, give orders, and enforce
compliance. Authority typically stems from formal roles or
positions within the organization's structure. Here are five
characteristics of authority:

1. Formal Structure: Authority is typically vested in specific roles

or positions within the organizational hierarchy. These positions
are defined by job titles, responsibilities, and reporting
relationships outlined in formal organizational charts and
policies.

2. Legitimacy: Authority derives its power from being perceived

as legitimate and sanctioned by the organization. It is recognized
as valid and justified by organizational norms, rules, and
procedures. Legitimate authority is essential for ensuring
compliance and maintaining order within the organization.

3. Hierarchical: Authority is often structured hierarchically, with

higher levels of authority existing at the top of the
organizational hierarchy and decreasing as one moves down the
chain of command. Those in higher positions typically have
broader authority to make decisions and give orders that affect a
larger scope of the organization.

4. Decision-making Power: Authority grants individuals or

positions the power to make decisions and take actions that
affect the organization's operations, goals, and strategies. This
includes the authority to allocate resources, set policies, define
 procedures, and resolve conflicts within their areas of
responsibility.

5. Accountability: Along with authority comes accountability.

Individuals with authority are accountable for the outcomes of
their decisions and actions within the scope of their
responsibilities. They may be held accountable by higher levels
of authority, stakeholders, or governing bodies within the
organization.
 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POWER AND AUTHORITY
BASIS POWER AUTHORITY

Definition: Power: Refers to the ability orAuthority: Denotes the legal

potential of an individual to and formal right possessed
influence others and control their
by a person to give
actions. It is a personal trait that
commands, make decisions,
can be exercised informally. and enforce compliance.
Authority is conferred based
on position and office
within an organization
SOURCE: Power: Derives from knowledge Authority: Resides with the
and expertise. It is not tied to any designation of a high
specific hierarchy. official. It follows a
hierarchical structure within
an organization
LEGITIMACY Power: Not necessarily Authority: Always
legitimate; it can be informal and legitimate, as it is conferred
charismatic. through formal channels

HIERARCHY Power: Does not follow any Authority: Follows the

hierarchy; it can flow in any organizational hierarchy,
direction (upward, downward, flowing downward from
horizontally, or diagonal). superior to subordinate

SCOPE Power: Not confined to specific Authority: Restricted to the

boundaries; can be exercised organization where the
across various contexts. position is held

VOLUNTARY Power: This may not require Authority: Generally

CONSENT consent; can be imposed. exercised to get things done
through others, implying
some level of consent
 TYPES OF POWER
Formal power within organizations often derives from various
bases, including coercive, legitimate, and reward power. Here's
an explanation of each:

Coercive Power: Coercive power is based on the ability to

punish or threaten others to compel them to comply with
directives. It involves the use of negative reinforcement, such as
disciplinary actions, penalties, or sanctions, to influence
behavior. Individuals or positions with coercive power may
enforce compliance through fear of consequences, such as
demotions, reprimands, or even termination. Coercive power is
typically associated with positions higher in the organizational
hierarchy, where individuals have the authority to administer
disciplinary measures.

Example: In a corporate setting, a manager may possess

coercive power by having the authority to reprimand, demote, or
even terminate employees who fail to meet performance
expectations. For instance, if an employee consistently misses
deadlines, the manager may threaten to write a negative
performance review or impose disciplinary action if the
behavior persists. This threat of negative consequences compels
the employee to comply with the manager's expectations out of
fear of reprisal.

Legitimate Power: Legitimate power is derived from the formal

authority vested in a position within the organizational
hierarchy. It is based on the acceptance of authority by
subordinates as legitimate and rightful. Legitimate power is
conferred by organizational norms, rules, and procedures, as
well as by social expectations regarding hierarchical structures.
Individuals in positions of legitimate power have the authority
to make decisions, give orders, and expect compliance from
subordinates based on their formal roles within the organization.

Example: In a government agency, the director holds legitimate

power because their position is formally recognized as the
highest authority within the organization. Employees within the
agency are expected to comply with the director's directives and
decisions because they recognize the director's authority as
legitimate. For example, if the director mandates a new policy or
procedure, employees are likely to adhere to it without question
because it is within the director's authority to set such
guidelines.

Reward Power: Reward power stems from the ability to

provide rewards or incentives to influence the behavior of
others. It involves the use of positive reinforcement, such as
bonuses, promotions, recognition, or other desirable outcomes,
to motivate individuals to comply with directives or achieve
organizational goals. Individuals or positions with reward power
have the authority to allocate resources, assign tasks, or grant
benefits in exchange for desired behaviors or performance.
Reward power can enhance employee motivation, engagement,
and satisfaction when used effectively within the organization.
Example: A sales manager in a retail company may wield
reward power by offering performance-based bonuses or
incentives to motivate sales representatives to achieve their
targets. For instance, the manager may promise a cash bonus or
a gift voucher to the top-performing salesperson of the month.
This reward serves as an incentive for sales representatives to
exert greater effort and perform well to attain the desired
outcome, such as meeting sales targets or exceeding customer
satisfaction goals.
In contrast to formal power, which is typically associated
with organizational roles and hierarchies, informal power
derives from personal qualities, relationships, and expertise.
Two primary bases of informal power are expert power and
referent power. Let's delve into each of them:

Expert Power:

Definition: Expert power is based on an individual's knowledge,

skills, or expertise in a particular domain. It stems from others'
perception that the individual possesses valuable knowledge or
expertise that is relevant and beneficial to the organization.
Example: Imagine a software development team where one of
the members, let's call him Alex, is widely recognized for their
programming skills and deep understanding of coding
languages. Despite not holding a formal leadership position,
Alex commands respect and influence within the team because
other members acknowledge and trust Alex's expertise. When
the team encounters technical challenges or decisions, they often
defer to Alex's judgment and recommendations due to their
confidence in Alex's expertise.

Referent Power:

Definition: Referent power is based on the personal qualities,

characteristics, or charisma of an individual that attract
admiration, respect, or identification from others. It arises from
a sense of affiliation, admiration, or emotional connection
between the individual and those influenced by them.

Example: Consider a project manager named Sarah who

possesses exceptional interpersonal skills, empathy, and a
positive attitude. Sarah's colleagues and team members feel a
strong sense of affinity and connection with her because of her
approachable demeanor and ability to inspire trust and loyalty.
 As a result, Sarah wields referent power within the team, as her
colleagues willingly support her initiatives, follow her guidance,
and collaborate effectively due to their admiration and respect
for her as a leader.

IMPORTANCE OF POWER IN OB
Providing direction: Power within an organization allows decision-
makers to set a clear direction and vision for the company. This
ensures that everyone is aligned toward common goals and objectives.
Get fast access to decision-makers: Individuals with power can
facilitate quicker decision-making processes by having direct access
to decision-makers. This speed is crucial in today's fast-paced
business environment where delays can be costly.
Maintain regular, frequent contact with decision-makers: Power
enables individuals to maintain regular communication with decision-
makers, ensuring that information flows smoothly up and down the
organizational hierarchy. This facilitates transparency, collaboration,
and the timely resolution of issues.

Assisting in the management process: Power plays a crucial role in

the management process by empowering leaders to implement
strategies, allocate resources, and oversee operations effectively. It
ensures that tasks are completed efficiently and goals are achieved.
Structure to organizations: Power helps establish and maintain the
organizational structure by defining roles, responsibilities, and
reporting relationships. This structure provides clarity, stability, and
accountability within the organization.
Assist employees in performing better: Power can be used to
motivate and support employees in performing their best. Through
empowerment and recognition, individuals are encouraged to
contribute their skills and talents towards organizational success.
Articulate the goals: Those with power have the authority to
articulate and communicate the organization's goals effectively. Clear
goal-setting helps align efforts, motivate employees, and track
progress toward achieving desired outcomes.

POSITIVE EFFECTS OF POWER

Leadership responsibilities: Power often accompanies
leadership roles within an organization. With power comes the
responsibility to lead, guide, and inspire others towards
achieving common goals. Leaders wield power to influence and
motivate their teams, driving performance and success.
Organizational and personal goals: Those in positions of
power have the ability to align organizational goals with
personal goals. By leveraging their authority, they can ensure
that individual objectives contribute to the broader aims of the
organization, fostering a sense of purpose and alignment among
employees.

Inspire commitment: Power can be used to inspire commitment

among employees by providing direction, support, and recognition.
When individuals feel empowered by those in authority, they are more
likely to be committed to their work and the organization as a whole,
leading to increased productivity and morale.
Creativity: Effective leaders harness their power to foster a
culture of creativity and innovation within the organization. By
encouraging risk-taking, experimentation, and open
communication, they create an environment where new ideas
can flourish, driving continuous improvement and adaptation to
change.
Reduction of bureaucratic obstacles: Power can be
instrumental in streamlining processes and reducing
bureaucratic obstacles within an organization. Leaders with
authority can make decisions efficiently, cut through red tape,
and implement changes that enhance efficiency and
effectiveness, thereby improving overall organizational
performance.

NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF POWER

Bully Bosses: In some cases, individuals in positions of power
may misuse their authority to engage in bullying behavior
towards their subordinates. This can include verbal abuse,
intimidation, or the unfair allocation of tasks or resources.
Bullying bosses create toxic work environments that can lead to
decreased morale, productivity, and employee well-being.
Manipulation: Power can be used as a tool for manipulation,
where individuals exploit their authority to advance their own
agendas at the expense of others. This can involve manipulating
information, relationships, or decision-making processes to
serve personal interests rather than the best interests of the
organization or its employees. Such behavior erodes trust,
damages relationships, and undermines organizational
effectiveness.
Sexual harassment: When individuals in positions of power
engage in sexual harassment, it creates a deeply harmful and
hostile work environment. This abuse of power involves
unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other
verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. Sexual harassment
not only violates the rights and dignity of the victim but also
contributes to feelings of fear, discomfort, and powerlessness
among employees.

WHAT IS POWER TACTICS

In an organizational context, power tactics refer to the strategies
and methods individuals use to influence others and achieve
their goals within the workplace. These tactics leverage various
sources of power, such as formal authority, expertise,
relationships, or personal attributes, to exert influence and
persuade others to comply with their requests or support their
initiatives. Power tactics are essential for navigating
organizational dynamics, building relationships, and achieving
objectives effectively. They can vary in their approach, ranging
from rational persuasion and consultation to more coercive
tactics like pressure or manipulation. Effective leaders and
managers often employ a combination of power tactics
depending on the situation, the individuals involved, and the
desired outcomes, while also considering ethical considerations
and organizational norms.

TYPES OF POWER TACTICS

Legitimacy: This power tactic relies on the authority granted by
the organization's formal hierarchy. Individuals using legitimacy
as a power tactic assert their authority based on their official
position within the organization. For example, a manager may
exercise authority by invoking organizational policies or
procedures.
Rational persuasion: This tactic involves the use of logical
arguments and factual evidence to convince others to comply
with one's requests or proposals. Individuals employing rational
persuasion appeal to reason and present compelling arguments
to sway others' opinions or behaviors.
Inspirational appeals: Here, individuals use emotional appeals
and shared values to motivate others to support their objectives.
They inspire enthusiasm, commitment, and a sense of purpose
by appealing to higher ideals, visions, or aspirations that
resonate with their audience.
Consultation: This tactic involves seeking others' input, advice,
or involvement in decision-making processes. By consulting
with others and valuing their opinions, individuals can gain their
support and commitment to proposed actions or initiatives.
Exchange: Exchange power tactics involve offering rewards or
benefits in exchange for compliance with one's requests. This
can include offering incentives, favors, or tangible rewards in
return for cooperation or assistance.
Personal appeals: This tactic involves appealing to personal
relationships, friendships, or loyalty to influence others'
behaviors. Individuals using personal appeals may leverage
interpersonal connections and emotional bonds to gain support
or assistance.
Ingratiation: Ingratiation involves using flattery, praise, or
other forms of positive reinforcement to win favor with others.
Individuals employing this tactic may seek to cultivate goodwill,
build rapport, or enhance their likability to gain influence or
support.
Pressure: Pressure tactics rely on coercion, threats, or
intimidation to compel others to comply with one's demands.
This can involve exerting authority, issuing ultimatums, or
creating a sense of fear or obligation to induce compliance.
Coalitions: This tactic involves forming alliances or building
coalitions with others to increase one's power and influence. By
mobilizing support from like-minded individuals or groups,
individuals can amplify their voices and exert greater pressure
or leverage within the organization.

WHAT IS POLITICS
Politics in an organization refers to the informal processes,
behaviors, and strategies individuals employ to gain power,
influence decisions, and advance their own interests within the
organizational context. It involves navigating complex social
dynamics, building alliances, and managing relationships to
achieve personal or group objectives. Organizational politics
often manifest in various forms, including networking, lobbying,
coalition-building, and the use of power tactics such as
persuasion, manipulation, or coercion.
NEED OF POLITICS IN AN ORGANISATION
Resource Allocation: Organizations have limited resources,
including budgets, staff, and time. Competition for these
resources can be fierce, leading individuals and groups to
engage in political behavior to secure their share of resources
and support their priorities.
Decision-Making: Decision-making processes in organizations
can be influenced by various factors, including personal biases,
competing interests, and power dynamics. Politics often comes
into play as individuals seek to shape decisions in their favor or
influence the outcomes to align with their goals.
Conflict Resolution: Conflicts are inevitable in any
organization due to differences in goals, priorities, and
perspectives. Politics can be used as a means of resolving
conflicts by negotiating compromises, building consensus, or
leveraging power dynamics to achieve favorable outcomes.
Career Advancement: In hierarchical organizations, career
advancement often depends on factors beyond individual
performance, such as visibility, relationships, and political
acumen. Engaging in political behavior can help individuals
navigate the organizational hierarchy, gain recognition, and
access opportunities for career growth and advancement.
Organizational Change: Implementing organizational change
initiatives often involves overcoming resistance, building
support, and managing stakeholders' interests. Political savvy is
essential for navigating the complexities of change management
and securing buy-in from key stakeholders.

TYPES OF POLITICS
Attacking and blaming: This type of politics involves
deflecting blame onto others or undermining their reputation to
protect oneself or advance one's interests. Individuals may
engage in scapegoating, finger-pointing, or character
assassination to shift responsibility away from themselves and
maintain their own standing within the organization.
Controlling information: In this tactic, individuals manipulate
or withhold information to gain an advantage or maintain
control over decision-making processes. By controlling access
to key information, individuals can shape perceptions, limit
transparency, and influence outcomes to serve their own
interests or objectives.
Forming coalitions: Organizational politics often involves
building alliances or coalitions with like-minded individuals or
groups to amplify one's influence and achieve common
objectives. By pooling resources, sharing information, and
leveraging collective power, individuals can increase their
effectiveness in shaping decisions and outcomes within the
organization.
Cultivating networks: Networking is a strategic political tactic
wherein individuals actively cultivate relationships with key
stakeholders, decision-makers, and influencers within the
organization. By nurturing a strong network of connections,
individuals can gain access to valuable resources, information,
and support, enhancing their ability to navigate organizational
dynamics and advance their interests.
Creating obligations: This tactic involves using favors, debts,
or reciprocity to create obligations and gain leverage over
others. By doing favors for colleagues or providing assistance
when needed, individuals can establish a sense of indebtedness,
which they can later call upon to elicit support, compliance, or
concessions.
Managing impressions: Managing impressions involves
controlling one's image, reputation, and perception within the
organization to enhance one's credibility, influence, or likability.
Individuals may engage in impression management tactics such
as self-promotion, image crafting, or impression manipulation to
cultivate a favorable perception of themselves and garner
support for their goals or initiatives.

EFFECTS OF POLITICS
Decrease in job satisfaction: When organizational politics are
prevalent, employees may feel that their contributions are
undervalued, and their efforts are overshadowed by political
maneuvering. This can lead to a decrease in job satisfaction as
employees become disillusioned with their work environment
and feel disengaged from their roles.
Increased anxiety and stress: The presence of organizational
politics can create a tense and competitive work environment
where individuals feel pressured to navigate complex power
dynamics and protect their interests. This heightened sense of
competition and uncertainty can lead to increased anxiety and
stress among employees as they strive to navigate political
minefields and maintain their positions within the organization.
Decreased overall productivity: Organizational politics can
divert attention and resources away from productive work
activities, as employees may spend time and energy engaging in
political maneuvering or defending themselves against political
attacks. This can result in a decrease in overall productivity as
organizational goals take a backseat to individual agendas and
self-preservation.
Affects concentration: Constant exposure to organizational
politics can impair employees' ability to concentrate and focus
on their tasks. The stress and distraction caused by political
dynamics can make it challenging for employees to maintain
attention to detail and meet performance expectations, leading to
decreased effectiveness and efficiency in their work.
Spoils the ambiance: The presence of organizational politics
can create a negative and toxic work environment characterized
by suspicion, distrust, and conflict. This can spoil the ambiance
within the organization, making it unpleasant and uncomfortable
for employees to work collaboratively and effectively.
Changes in the attitude of employees: Organizational politics
can sour employees' attitudes towards their work, colleagues,
and the organization as a whole. When individuals perceive that
success is determined more by political savvy than merit or hard
work, it can erode morale and foster cynicism, leading to a
decline in employee engagement and commitment.
Demotivated employees: The perception of unfairness or
favoritism resulting from organizational politics can demotivate
employees and dampen their enthusiasm for their work. When
employees feel that their efforts are not recognized or rewarded
fairly, they may become disheartened and lose motivation to
perform at their best.
Wrong information: In environments characterized by
organizational politics, misinformation or distorted facts may
circulate as individuals manipulate information to serve their
own interests or undermine their competitors. This can lead to
confusion, misunderstandings, and poor decision-making as
employees struggle to discern truth from falsehood amidst the
political noise.

Political Strategies for Attaining Power in Organizations

Maintain Alliances with Powerful People: Align yourself with

influential figures within the organization to gain support and
protection.
Embrace or Demolish: Either cooperate with or eliminate
rivals depending on their usefulness to your goals.
Divide and Rule: Create divisions or exploit existing ones
within the organization to weaken opposition and consolidate
power.
Manipulate Classified Information: Control or manipulate
access to information to gain leverage over others and maintain
an advantage
Make a Quick Showing: Demonstrate competence or
effectiveness swiftly to establish credibility and influence.
Collect and Use IOUs: Accumulate favors or debts owed to you
by others within the organization to leverage support or
compliance.
Avoid Decisive Engagement (Fabianism): Refrain from
committing to decisive actions or confrontations, opting instead
for gradual or indirect methods of achieving goals.
Attacking and Blaming Others: Shift blame or direct attacks
toward others to deflect attention from your own shortcomings
or to undermine opponents.
Progress One Step at a Time (Camel’s Head in the Tent):
Advance your agenda incrementally, gradually gaining ground
without provoking significant opposition.
 Wait for a Crisis (Things Must Get Worse Before They Get
Better): Exploit moments of crisis or instability within the
organization to push through changes or consolidate power.
Take Counsel with Caution: Seek advice and input from
others, but be selective and cautious in whom you trust, as some
may have ulterior motives.
Be Aware of Resource Dependence: Understand and manipulate
dependencies on resources such as funding, expertise, or support to
exert influence and control.

WHAT IS CONFLICT
Conflict in an organization refers to a disagreement or clash between
individuals or groups within the organizational context. These conflicts
can arise from various sources, including differences in goals, values,
interests, or perspectives. Conflict is a natural and inevitable aspect of
organizational life, as individuals and groups with diverse backgrounds
and objectives interact and work together.
SOURCES OF CONFLICT
Incompatibility of Goals: Conflict can arise when individuals or
groups within an organization have goals that are incompatible or
contradictory. For example, one department may prioritize increasing
efficiency, while another department may prioritize innovation. This
misalignment can lead to competition for resources or conflicting
priorities, resulting in tension and conflict between the parties involved.
Incompatibility of goals can also occur at an individual level when
employees have personal objectives that conflict with the goals of their
team or the organization as a whole.
Differences in Interpretations of Facts: Conflict can emerge when
there are discrepancies in how individuals or groups interpret factual
information or data. For instance, one team may interpret market
research data as indicating a need to launch a new product, while
another team may interpret the same data as suggesting that the market
is not yet ready for such a product. These differing interpretations can
lead to disagreements over strategy, decision-making, or resource
allocation, fueling conflict within the organization.
Disagreements over Behavioral Expectations: Conflict may arise
when there are differing expectations regarding appropriate behavior or
conduct within the organization. This can include disagreements over
work norms, communication styles, or ethical standards. For example,
one team may expect employees to prioritize collaboration and
teamwork, while another team may prioritize individual autonomy and
self-reliance. These conflicting behavioral expectations can result in
misunderstandings, friction, and interpersonal conflicts among
employees, undermining morale and productivity.
TYPES AND LOCI OF CONFLICT
TYPES
Task, Relationship, and Process Conflicts:

Task Conflict: This type of conflict arises when individuals or groups

within an organization have differing opinions, perspectives, or
approaches regarding the tasks or goals to be accomplished. Task
conflict can occur, for example, when team members disagree on the
best strategy to achieve a project objective or when there are conflicting
priorities among different departments. While task conflict may lead to
productive discussions and innovative solutions when managed
effectively, it can also escalate into destructive conflict if not addressed
promptly
Relationship Conflict: Relationship conflict, also known as
interpersonal conflict, occurs when there are tensions, animosities, or
negative emotions between individuals or groups within the
organization. This type of conflict often stems from personal
differences, communication breakdowns, or past grievances rather than
disagreements over tasks or goals. Relationship conflict can impair
collaboration, trust, and morale within the organization, leading to
reduced productivity and increased turnover if left unresolved.
Process Conflict: Process conflict arises from disagreements over the
methods, procedures, or decision-making processes used to accomplish
tasks or achieve goals within the organization. This can include
conflicts over how resources are allocated, how tasks are delegated, or
how decisions are made. Process conflict may result from perceived
unfairness, lack of transparency, or inefficiency in organizational
processes, leading to frustration and dissatisfaction among employees.
LOCI
Dyadic, Intergroup, and Intragroup Conflicts:
Dyadic Conflict: Dyadic conflict refers to conflicts that occur between
two individuals or entities within the organization. This could involve
conflicts between a supervisor and a subordinate, between colleagues
on the same team, or between representatives of different departments.
Dyadic conflicts may arise from interpersonal tensions, communication
breakdowns, or differences in expectations, and they can have a
significant impact on the individuals involved as well as on team
dynamics and organizational culture.
Intergroup Conflict: Intergroup conflict occurs between two or more
groups or departments within the organization. This could involve
conflicts between different teams, divisions, or branches, often
stemming from competition for resources, turf, or recognition.
Intergroup conflicts may be fueled by perceived differences in goals,
priorities, or values, and they can lead to decreased collaboration,
coordination, and cohesion within the organization if not addressed
effectively.
Intragroup Conflict: Intragroup conflict arises within a single group
or team within the organization. This could involve conflicts between
individual members of the group or disagreements over group norms,
roles, or decision-making processes. Intragroup conflicts may arise
from issues such as role ambiguity, personality clashes, or unequal
distribution of workload and responsibilities. If not managed properly,
intragroup conflicts can disrupt team dynamics, hinder cooperation,
and impede the achievement of group goals.
STAGES IN THE CONFLICT PROCESS

STAGE 1 POTENTIAL OPPOSITON/INCOMPATIBILITY

Communication
Susan had worked in supply chain management at BristolMyers
Squibb for three years. She enjoyed her work largely because her
manager, Harry, was a great boss. Then Harry was promoted and
Chuck took his place. Six months later, Susan says her job is
frustrating. “Harry and I were on the same wavelength. It’s not that
way with Chuck. He tells me something, and I do it. Then he tells me
I did it wrong. I think he means one thing but says something else. It’s
been like this since the day he arrived. I don’t think a day goes by
when he isn’t yelling at me for something. You know, there are some
people you just find it easy to communicate with. Well, Chuck isn’t
one of those!” Her experience represents the opposing forces that
arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and “noise” in the
communication channel. These factors, along with jargon and
insufficient information, can be barriers to communication and
potential antecedent conditions to conflict. The potential for conflict
has also been found to increase with too little or too much
communication. Communication is functional up to a point, after
which it is possible to overcommunicate, increasing the potential for
conflict
Structure
Charlotte is a salesperson and Mercedes is the company credit
manager at Portland Furniture Mart, a large discount furniture retailer.
The women have known each other for years and have much in
common: They live two blocks apart, and their oldest daughters attend
the same middle school and are best friends. If Charlotte and
Mercedes had different jobs, they might be friends, but at work they
constantly disagree. Charlotte’s job is to sell furniture, and she does it
well. Most of her sales are made on credit. Because Mercedes’s job is
to minimize credit losses, she regularly has to turn down the credit
applications of Charlotte’s customers. It’s nothing personal between
the women; the requirements of their jobs just bring them into
conflict.
The conflicts between Charlotte and Mercedes are structural in nature.
The term structure in this context includes variables such as size of
group, degree of specialization in tasks assigned to group members,
jurisdictional clarity, member–goal compatibility, leadership styles,
reward systems, and degree of dependence between groups. The
larger the group and the more specialized its activities, the greater the
likelihood of conflict. Tenure and conflict are inversely related,
meaning that the longer a person stays with an organization, the less
likely conflict becomes. Therefore, the potential for conflict is
greatest when group members are younger and when turnover is high.
Personal Variables
Include:
Personality
emotions, and
values.
People high in the personality traits of disagreeableness, neuroticism,
or self-monitoring are prone to tangle with other people more often—
and to react poorly when conflicts occur. Emotions can cause conflict
even when they are not directed at others. An employee who shows up
to work irate from her hectic morning commute may carry that anger
into her workday, which can result in a tension-filled meeting.
Furthermore, differences in preferences and values can generate
higher levels of conflict.
If the conditions cited in Stage I negatively affect something one party
cares about, then the potential for opposition or incompatibility
becomes actualized in the second stage.
STAGE 2 Cognition and Personalization
Perceived conflict: Awareness by one or more parties of the
existence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise.
Felt conflict: Emotional involvement in a conflict that creates
anxiety, tenseness, frustration, or hostility.
Stage II is important because it’s where conflict issues tend to be
defined, where the parties decide what the conflict is about.
Stage III: Intentions

Intentions: Decisions to act in a given way.

Intentions intervene between people’s perceptions and emotions,
and their overt behavior. They are decisions to act in a given way.
Intentions are a distinct stage because we have to infer the other’s
intent to know how to respond to behavior. Many conflicts escalate
simply because one party attributes the wrong intentions to the other.
There is slippage between intentions and behavior, so behavior does
not always accurately reflect a person’s intentions.

The figure represents one way to identify the primary conflict-

handling intentions.
Using two dimensions—assertiveness (the degree to which one party
attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns) and cooperativeness (the
degree to which one party attempts to satisfy the other party’s
concerns)—
we can identify five conflict-handling intentions:
1. competing (assertive and uncooperative),
2. collaborating (assertive and cooperative),
3. avoiding (unassertive and uncooperative),
4. accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and

5. compromising (midrange on both assertiveness and

cooperativeness

Stage IV: Behavior

When most people think of conflict, they tend to focus on Stage IV
because this is where conflicts become visible.
The behavior stage includes statements, actions, and reactions made
by conflicting parties, usually as overt attempts to implement their
own intentions. As a result of miscalculations or unskilled enactments,
overt behaviors sometimes deviate from original intentions.
Stage IV is a dynamic process of interaction. For example, you make
a demand on me, I respond by arguing, you threaten me, I threaten
you back, and so on.
The model provides a way of visualizing conflict behavior. All
conflicts exist somewhere along this continuum. At the lower end are
conflicts characterized by subtle, indirect, and highly controlled forms
of tension, such as a student challenging a point the instructor has
made. Conflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the
continuum until they become highly destructive. Strikes, riots, and
wars clearly fall in this upper range. Conflicts that reach the upper
ranges of the continuum are almost always dysfunctional. Functional
conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the continuum.
Stage V: outcomes
The action–reaction interplay between conflicting parties creates
consequences. The outcomes may be functional if the conflict
improves the group’s performance, or dysfunctional if it hinders
performance
Functional outcomes: How might conflict act as a force to increase
group performance? It is hard to visualize a situation in which open or
violent aggression could be functional. But it’s possible to see how
low or moderate levels of conflict could improve group effectiveness.
Dysfunctional outcomes: The destructive consequences of conflict on
the performance of a group or an organization are generally well
known: Uncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to
dissolve common ties and eventually leads to the destruction of the
group. Among the undesirable consequences are poor communication,
reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to
the primacy of infighting among members. All forms of conflict—
even the functional varieties—appear to reduce group member
satisfaction and trust.24 When active discussions turn into open
conflicts between members, information sharing between members
decreases significantly