Workplace Conflict

Conflict Management Styles

Fri, 19 Jan 2024 21:52:36 GMT

Why Conflict Management Approaches Matter...

One of the major implications conflict management styles have on group dynamics is group morale. Therefore, leadership unable to apply a conflict management approach that bodes well with members of the group can exacerbate the existing conflict. This can drive a wedge between members of the group, as well as the way members view leadership. Group members may eventually have a loss of confidence in leadership’s abilities to support them and help overcome challenges necessary for the success of the group.

Moreover, decreased group morale can easily transcend into other forms of conflict and additional facets of the organization. For instance, relationship conflict can start to spew over into task conflict. Group members will likely start to pull away, impacting performance and future involvement. Ayoko and Konrad (2012) found that group performance and levels of morale were negatively impacted by task and relationship conflict yet, were resolved via effective leadership. Due to the negative repercussions of unmanaged or poorly managed group conflict, it is imperative that leaders are aware of different conflict management approaches and when best to apply them.

Group Formation

nmtfletcher22@gmail.com (Nina Fletcher) — Fri, 19 Jan 2024 21:30:59 GMT

Stages of Group Formation

Group Formation Theories & Models

Below is a quick snapshot of relevant group formation theories and models that were explored when developing the proposed Group Formation Stages:

Tuckman’s Model: A five-stage model that identified stages that needed to achieved to reach a high-functioning, effective team (Bonebright, 2010).
Social Exchange Theory: Describes human behavior as an exchange between two entities, where the cost and benefits of an exchange are weighed in an effort to maximize the return (Zafirovski, 2005).
Propinquity Theory : Individuals or entities that are geographically close to one another in proximity have a likelihood of being grouped together or forming relationships (Rafida, 2018).
Homan’s Interaction Theory: Examines the relationships between activities, interactions, and sentiments (Olofu et al., 2020). The more shared sentiments and/or activities the greater the interaction, which impacts task performance. (Olofu et al., 2020).

Group Formation Stages

Needs Identification

The initial rationale and stage one of group formation was noted as needs identification and aligned heavily with social exchange theory. Thus, an underlying need cannot be met without engagement with another entity. Through that relationship, a desired end state or outcome (reward) can be achieved. This can be a tangible outcome, such as a contract, or an intangible outcome, such as friendship.

Shaping

After the identification of a specific need, a group starts to take shape. This can be a result of factors such as individual competencies, who is available at the required period in time, direct tasking, as well as who is geographically accessible. The last factor noted ties into propinquity theory.

Learning

During the learning stage, individuals start to learn and identify the necessary requirements to carry out the need and what competencies each individual on the team possesses to help achieve that requirement. This starts to align with Tuckman’s first stage of forming (Bonebright, 2010). However, the current model breaks out Tuckman’s first stage of forming and second stage of storming, and third stage of norming into a 3-stage cycle in the middle of the proposed model.

Understanding

Based on what was established in the learning stage, group members start to understand how each person’s skill set can be accounted for via overall organizational structure, roles, norms, and rules.

Adjusting

During the adjusting stage, the group makes modifications that are required to achieve the desired end state. Intergroup conflict may occur at any point throughout the aforementioned stages. If intergroup conflict is preventing the ability to carry out the tasks or the group needs to make further adjustments to the existing structure, the group may go back through either or both the learning and/or understanding stage. If the group works independently and is able to complete the task without having or wanting interdependency, the group may complete the task and then move into the adjourning stage. If the group makes adjustments and engages in a fashion that starts to build interdependencies, then they may transition into the synergizing stage.

Synergizing

This stage could be thought of as the point in time when the group transitions to a team. They have moved past the foundational components necessary to achieve the task and have established interdependency and a desire to work together to reach their goal(s). Tuckman doesn’t differentiate between group and team in his model; however, I believe this stage aligns with his fourth stage of performing. Further, Homan’s interaction theory is postulated within this stage, as individuals at this point are likely to have greater sentiment and activities together generating higher, more productive interactions (Olofu et al., 2020).

Growing

Some teams may continue to evolve over time due to a desire to modify or expand upon their identified original needs. Additionally, in any relationship that continues to persist, there are periods of growth where members have to make the necessary pivots to stay aligned and function effectively.

Adjourning

Adjourning may occur at any point throughout the model. Adjourning is based on Tuckman’s model and seeks to note that dismantling the group or team is a necessary stage to conclude group formation (Bonebright, 2010).

Application

The use of group formation models, offers the ability for employers, employees, and practitioners to better understand group dynamics. This level of group-awareness can help provide a framework to move through when initially forming a group. Additionally, it can generate discussions surrounding social dimensions and expectations. All groups will have different nuances due to the identified needs, membership, and time available. Consequently, impacting how the model is applied. Overall, the goal of this model is to be a resource that drives conversation and aids groups to reach the desired outcomes the group would like to achieve.

References

Bonebright, D. (2010). 40 years of storming: A historical review of Tuckman’s model of small group development.

Olofu, P.A., Kanu, N.O., Ugochigborogu, K.M. (2020). Understanding the dynamics of group formation and its application in educational administration in Nigeria: The perspective of interaction and balance theories. BSUJEM, 2 (1).

Rafida, T. (2018). The effect of physical working environment, group dynamics, and coping strategies on English lecturer’s occupational stress at three universities of North Sumatera. Dinamika Ilmu, 18 (1), 137-150.

Zafirovski, M. (2005). Social exchange theory under scrutiny: A positive critique of its economic behaviorist formulations. Electronic Journal of Sociology, 1-40.

Workplace Conflict

Thu, 18 Jan 2024 23:01:55 GMT

Quick Snapshot into Workplace Conflict

What is Group Conflict?

Group conflict occurs when there are misunderstandings or disagreements between two or more actors (Driskell et al., 2017). The reason could stem from intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup, or intergroup conflict (Burton-Hughes, 2017). Awareness of the varied forms of group conflict can help identify, address, and/or diffuse the root cause of the issue. From there, the best conflict resolution approach can be applied. Noted below are three main forms of group conflict.

Common Forms of Group Conflict

Task Conflict: “or cognitive conflict, is a perception of disagreements among group members about the content of their decisions and involves differences in viewpoints, ideas, and opinions” (Simons & Peterson, 2000). Task conflict could result due to differences in how an organization’s process should be carried out and how it affects one’s work duties. However, task conflict has shown that it can be beneficial in aiding group decision-making via a greater understanding of issues among group members and increased satisfaction with decisions made (Simons & Peterson, 2000).

Relationship Conflict: “an interpersonal struggle based on differing beliefs, personalities, or experiences, with little respect to the task at hand” (Kozlowski, 2022). Relationship conflict can be thought of as a conflict between two individuals versus a task conflict which could be thought of as an individual against a specific organizational task/process (Kozlowski, 2022). We can all relate to the struggle when two people on your team do not get along and seem to have a clash of personalities. Thus, relationship conflict can create emotional tension that can then lead to other forms of conflict, such as task conflict.

Status Conflict: “disputes over people’s relative status positions in their group’s social hierarchy” (Pai & Bendersky, 2020). Status disagreements can occur when individuals prioritize their advancement in status over the needs and interests of the group (Pai & Bendersky, 2020). Status conflict can snowball into other forms of conflict and can drastically hinder group performance (Bendersky & Hays, 2012).

Impact Conflict has on Groups

The type of conflict and how the conflict is managed can influence whether the impact of conflict on a group is either negative or positive. In some instances, group conflict can act as a “possible barrier to team effectiveness” and, in other situations, can be the driver of team effectiveness (Maltarich et al., 2018). Negative group conflict can be a result of factors such as personal/emotional issues, competition over resources, communication breakdowns, or external work conditions (Lumen, n.d.). While positive group conflict can “spark new ideas and generate creativity,” as well as help avoid groupthink (Lumen, n.d.).

The Role Personality Plays in Group Conflict

With the continued advancement of technology, organizations today are able to do business around the world, despite differing time zones, language disparities, or cultures. While members of groups are also able to work geographically dispersed, thanks to platforms like Microsoft Teams and Zoom. Further, there is a push to generate diversity, innovation, and new ideas in the workplace to remain competitive. With such comes conflict. When we use the Cycle of Socialization to better understand how individual differences are influenced by a variety of inputs, it is easy to understand how such can result in disagreements (Harro, 2000). Further, personality specifically can be viewed as a key player in the emergence of conflict and how conflict is managed (Anderson, 2009; Bono et al., 2002).

The American Psychological Association (2023) defines personality as “the enduring configuration of characteristics and behavior that comprises an individual’s unique adjustment to life, including major traits, interests, drives, values, self-concept, abilities, and emotional patterns.” If we do not take the time to understand one another as individuals, then we fail to account for the humanistic element of interactions. Thus, “developing our understanding of how group personality composition affects both of these types of conflict [task and relationship] is necessary to better enable groups to manage conflict, and thereby lessen potentially harmful outcomes resulting from conflict” (Anderson, 2009).

When exploring where individual differences occur with regard to personality, there are three levels (traits, actions, and life narratives) (Bono et al., 2002). The three levels of personality can help one better understand how one manages conflict and interprets conflict (Bono et al., 2002). Further, using the Five-Factor Model has provided a framework for better understanding personality. Thus, Bono and colleagues (2002) found that individuals scoring high in agreeableness often reported fewer number of conflicts in comparison to those high in neuroticism or openness.

Considerations to Manage Group Conflict

Edmondson & Smith (2006) provide some great suggestions to overcome relationship conflict that can easily be applied to situations where conflict is a result of personality differences. I have highlighted a few recommendations below:

When hot triggers surface, before an emotional response occurs, leadership can work to encourage reframing and reflecting. They can do this by driving the conversation to a cooler zone via the facilitation of a discussion around different beliefs and helping the group to consider new points of view.
Leadership maps out how personality differences create group conflict. Showcasing where it is hindering decision-making abilities and working with the group to develop ways to overcome such.
Create a space where group emotional reactions and the reason for such emotions can and are discussed openly.
The organization fosters and provides time for coworkers to get to know one another and build trust with one another.

References

American Psychological Association. (2023). Personality. https://dictionary.apa.org/personality?_ga=2.116778630.1240992655.1679423098-1682154112.1678055448

Anderson, M. H. (2009). The role of group personality composition in the emergence of task and relationship conflict within groups. J ournal of Management & Organization, 15 , 82-96.

Bendersky, C., & Hays, N. A. (2012). Status conflict in groups. Organization Science, 23 (2), 323-340.

Bono, J. E., Boles, T. L., Judge, T. A., & Lauver, K. J. (2002). The role of personality in task and relationship conflict. Journal of Personality, 70 (3), 311-344.

Burton-Hughes, L. (2017). Understanding the different types of group conflict: A guide for managers. https://www.highspeedtraining.co.uk/hub/types-of-group-conflict-guide-for-managers/

Driskell, T., Salas, E., Driskell, J. E. (2018). Teams in extreme environments: Alterations in team development and teamwork. Human Resource Management Review, 28 (4), 434-449.

Edmondson, A. C., & Smith, D. M. (2006). Too hot to handle? How to manage relationship conflict. California Management Review, 49 (1), 6-31.

Harro, B. (2000). The cycle of socialization . Readings for Diversity and Social Justice, Routledge.

Kozlowski, B. (2022). Task versus relationship conflict in the workplace. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/task-versus-relationship-conflict-workplace-beatrice?trk=pulse-article'

Lumen. (n.d.) Conflict within teams. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-principlesofmanagement/chapter/reading-conflict-within-teams/

Maltarich, M. A., Kukenberger, M., Reilly, G., & Mathieu, J. (2018). Conflict in Teams: Modeling Early and Late Conflict States and the Interactive Effects of Conflict Processes. Group & Organization Management, 43 (1), 6–37.

Pai, J., & Bendersky, C. (2020). Team status conflict. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 38-41.

ScrumAlliance. (n.d.). The key values and principles of agile manifesto. https://resources.scrumalliance.org/Article/key-values-principles-agile-manifesto

Simmons, T., & Peterson, R. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. J ournal of Applied Psychology, 85 (1), 102-111.

Workplace Conflict

Conflict Management Styles

Why Conflict Management Approaches Matter...

Group Formation

Stages of Group Formation

Workplace Conflict

Quick Snapshot into Workplace Conflict ﻿

Quick Snapshot into Workplace Conflict