Lee College Chapter 13 Organizational Theory & Conflict Management Essay Do the Chapter 13 Workshop activity, “How Do You Handle Conflict?” at the end of t
Lee College Chapter 13 Organizational Theory & Conflict Management Essay Do the Chapter 13 Workshop activity, “How Do You Handle Conflict?” at the end of the chapter on page 35 and 36 of the PDF. Answer questions 1-3 at the end of the activity (on page 36 of the PDF).
Attached is Chapter 13 of the textbook. CHAPTER
13
Learning Objectives
Interdepartmental Conflict in Organizations
After reading this chapter you should be
able to:
Power and Organizations
1.
2.
conflict.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Political Processes in Organizations
Using Soft Power and Politics
Design Essentials
512
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Chapter 13: Conflict, Power, and Politics
513
Before reading this chapter, please check whether you agree or disagree with
each of the following statements:
1
A certain amount of conflict is good for an organization.
2
A factory worker on the assembly line is in a low power position and should
accept that he or she will have little influence over what happens.
I AGREE
I AGREE
3
I DISAGREE
I DISAGREE
When managers use politics, it usually leads to conflict and disharmony and will
likely disrupt the smooth functioning of the organization.
I AGREE
I DISAGREE
In the summer of 2013, executives from Omnicom Group Inc. and Publicis Groupe
SA announced with much fanfare in Paris that the two companies were merging
to create the largest advertising agency in the world. As the summer of 2014
approached, however, the deal had not been completed and clashes over position
and power were largely to blame. For one thing, the two sides couldnt agree on
which company would legally be the acquirer, which held up the filing of necessary
paperwork. Beyond that, each company wanted its senior executives to fill top
positions in the new company. The deal was talked up as a merger of equals, and
John Wren of Omnicom and Maurice Lévy of Publicis agreed to serve as co-CEOs
for the first 30 months. But both men have strong personalities, which clashed
from the start. Communicating about the details of the merger grew increasingly
complicated. Martin Sorrell, CEO of one of the major rivals of the companies,
said, You have one talking Chinese and the other talking Japanese to illustrate
the conflicting messages the Omnicom and Publicis leaders were sending out about
the status of the proposed merger. The battle for control went on for nearly a year
before Wren and Lévy issued a joint statement in May 2014 saying that the deal was
off. It seems incredulous that this merger fell apart because of disagreements over
roles and responsibilities, said Brian Wieser, an analyst at Pivotal Research Group.1
It wasnt just roles and responsibilities, of course. What was really at stake
was control of the company, and each side wanted to have the most power. It isnt
the first organizational project to be derailed because of power clashes between
leaders. Managers at Research in Motion (now called BlackBerry Enterprise
Mobility) argued for years about whether the company should retain its corporate
and professional focus that once made the BlackBerry smartphone preferred by
corporations, government agencies, and the military or begin catering to the needs
and interests of ordinary consumers with machines that could easily play games
and access movies and music.2 The power struggle made it hard for the company to
reinvent itself for a new era, and BlackBerry is no longer in the running for being
the top smartphone.
Conflict such as that at BlackBerry and over the Omnicom Publicis merger is a
natural outcome of the close interaction of people who may have diverse opinions
and values, pursue different objectives, and have differential access to information
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
514
Part 5: Managing Dynamic Processes
and resources within the organization. Individuals and groups use power and
political activity to handle their differences and manage the inevitable conflicts that
arise.3 Too much conflict can be harmful to an organization. However, conflict can
also be a positive force because it challenges the status quo, encourages new ideas
and approaches, and leads to needed change.4 Some degree of conflict occurs in all
human relationshipsbetween friends, romantic partners, and teammates, as well
as between parents and children, teachers and students, and bosses and employees.
Conflict is not necessarily a negative force; it results from the normal interaction of
varying human interests. Within organizations, individuals and groups frequently
have different interests and goals they wish to achieve through the organization.
Managers can effectively use power and politics to manage conflict, get the most out
of employees, enhance job satisfaction and team identification, achieve important
goals, and realize high organizational performance.
Purpose of This Chapter
In this chapter we discuss the nature of conflict and the use of power and political
tactics to manage and reduce conflict among individuals and groups. The notions
of conflict, power, and politics have appeared in previous chapters. In Chapter 3
we talked about horizontal linkages such as task forces and teams that encourage
collaboration among functional departments. Chapter 4 introduced the concept
of differentiation, which means that different departments pursue different goals
and may have different attitudes and values. Chapter 5 touched on conflict and
power relationships among organizations. Chapter 10 discussed the emergence
of subcultures, and in Chapter 12 coalition building was proposed as one way to
resolve disagreements among managers and departments.
The first sections of this chapter explore the nature of intergroup conflict,
characteristics of organizations that contribute to conflict, the use of a political
versus a rational model of organization to manage conflicting interests, and some
tactics for reducing conflict and enhancing collaboration. Subsequent sections
examine individual and organizational power, the vertical and horizontal sources
of power for managers and other employees, and how power is used to attain
organizational goals. We also look at the trend toward empowerment, sharing
power with lower-level employees. The latter part of the chapter turns to politics,
which is the application of power and influence to achieve desired outcomes. We
discuss ways managers increase their power and various political tactics for using
power to influence others and accomplish desired goals.
Interdepartmental Conflict in Organizations
Conflict among departments and groups in organizations, called intergroup conflict,
requires three ingredients: group identification, observable group differences, and
frustration. First, employees have to perceive themselves as part of an identifiable
group or department.5 Second, there has to be an observable group difference of
some form. Groups may be located on different floors of the building, members
may have different social or educational backgrounds, or members may work in
different departments. The ability to identify oneself as a part of one group and to
observe differences in comparison with other groups is necessary for conflict.6
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Chapter 13: Conflict, Power, and Politics
The third ingredient is frustration. Frustration means that if one group achieves
its goal, the other will not; it will be blocked. Frustration need not be severe and
only needs to be anticipated to set off intergroup conflict. Intergroup conflict will
appear when one group tries to advance its position in relation to other groups.
Intergroup conflict can be defined as the behavior that occurs among organizational
groups when participants identify with one group and perceive that other groups
may block their groups goal achievement or expectations.7 Conflict means that
groups clash directly, that they are in fundamental opposition. Conflict is similar to
competition but more severe. Competition is rivalry among groups in the pursuit of a
common prize, whereas conflict presumes direct interference with goal achievement.
Intergroup conflict within organizations can occur horizontally across departments or vertically between different levels of the organization. 8 The production
department of a manufacturing company may have a dispute with quality control
because new quality procedures reduce production efficiency. R&D managers often
conflict with finance managers because the finance managers pressure to control
costs reduces the amount of funding for new R&D projects. Teammates may argue
about the best way to accomplish tasks and achieve goals.
Vertical conflict may occur when employees clash with bosses about new work
methods, reward systems, or job assignments. Another typical area of conflict
is between groups such as unions and management or franchise owners and
headquarters. For example, franchise owners for McDonalds, Taco Bell, Burger
King, and KFC have clashed with headquarters because of the increase of companyowned stores in neighborhoods that compete directly with franchisees.9
Conflict can also occur between different divisions or business units within an
organization, such as between the trading and investment banking division and the
retail banking division at Morgan Stanley. Traders and investment banking employees
have typically looked down on the retail business, seeing themselves as the elite of
Wall Street. Today, though, banks are under pressure from shareholders to increase
profits by finding ways for retail and investment banking to cooperate. Morgan
Stanley has recently made a number of changes intended to increase collaboration and
communication between the two divisions. However, as one analyst said, Morgan
Stanley has a horrible history of getting these two groups to work together. 10 In
global organizations, conflicts between regional managers and business division
managers, among different divisions, or between divisions and headquarters are
common because of the complexities of international business, as described in
Chapter 6. Similar problems occur between distinct organizations. As we briefly
discussed in Chapter 5, with so many companies involved in interorganizational
collaboration, conflicts and shifting power relationships are inevitable.
Sources of Conflict
Some specific organizational characteristics can generate conflict. These sources of
intergroup conflict are goal incompatibility, differentiation, task interdependence,
and limited resources. These characteristics of organizational relationships
are determined by the organizational structure and the contingency factors of
environment, size, technology, and strategy and goals, which have been discussed
in previous chapters. These characteristics, in turn, help shape the extent to which a
rational model of behavior versus a political model of behavior is used to accomplish
objectives.
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
515
516
Part 5: Managing Dynamic Processes
Goal Incompatibility. The goals of each department reflect the specific objectives
members are trying to achieve. The achievement of one departments goals often
interferes with another departments goals, leading to conflict. University police, for
example, have a goal of providing a safe and secure campus. They can achieve their
goal by locking all buildings on evenings and weekends and not distributing keys.
Without easy access to buildings, however, progress toward the science departments
research goals will proceed slowly. On the other hand, if scientists come and go at
all hours and security is ignored, police goals for security will not be met. Goal
incompatibility throws the departments into conflict with each other.
ASSESS
YOUR
1
A certain amount of conflict is good for an organization.
ANSWER: Agree.
ANSWER
In business organizations, the IT department is frequently in conflict with
managers of business departments because of goal incompatibility. Business
managers often want new devices or new systems and dont understand why the
CIO turns down the requests. The CIO, however, is responsible for making sure any
changes dont jeopardize the safety and security of the companys overall IT systems
and processes.11 The potential for conflict is perhaps greater between marketing
and manufacturing than between other departments because the goals of these two
departments are frequently at odds. Exhibit 13.1 shows examples of goal conflict
between typical marketing and manufacturing departments. Marketing strives to
increase the breadth of the product line to meet customer tastes for variety. A broad
EXHIBIT 13.1
MARKETING Versus MANUFACTURING
Goal Conflict
Conflict Area
Operative Goal Is Customer
Satisfaction
Typical Comment
Operative Goal Is Production
Efficiency
Typical Comment
–
Harvard Business Review
Industrial Marketing
Management
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Chapter 13: Conflict, Power, and Politics
product line means short production runs, so manufacturing has to bear higher
costs.12 Typical areas of goal conflict are quality, cost control, and new products or
services. Goal incompatibility is probably the greatest cause of intergroup conflict
in organizations.13
Differentiation. Differentiation was defined in Chapter 4 as the differences in
cognitive and emotional orientations among managers in different functional
departments. Functional specialization requires people with specific education,
skills, attitudes, and time horizons. For example, people may join a sales department
because they have ability and aptitude consistent with sales work. After becoming
members of the sales department, they are influenced by departmental norms and
values.
Departments or divisions within an organization often differ in values, attitudes,
and standards of behavior, and these subcultural differences lead to conflicts.14
Consider an encounter between a sales manager and a research and development
(R&D) scientist about a new product:
The sales manager may be outgoing and concerned with maintaining a warm,
friendly relationship with the scientist. He may be put off because the scientist
seems withdrawn and disinclined to talk about anything other than the
problems in which he is interested. He may also be annoyed that the scientist
seems to have such freedom in choosing what he will work on. Furthermore,
the scientist is probably often late for appointments, which, from the salesmans
point of view, is no way to run a business. Our scientist, for his part, may
feel uncomfortable because the salesman seems to be pressing for immediate
answers to technical questions that will take a long time to investigate. All
the discomforts are concrete manifestations of the relatively wide differences
between these two men in respect to their working and thinking styles.15
517
BRIEFCASE
As an organization
manager, keep these
guidelines in mind:
Recognize that some
interdepartmental
conflict is natural and
can benefit the organization. Associate the
organizational design
characteristics of goal
incompatibility, differentiation, task interdependence, and resource
scarcity with greater
conflict among groups.
Expect to devote more
time and energy to resolving conflict in these
situations.
Task Interdependence. Task interdependence refers to the dependence of one
unit on another for materials, resources, or information. As described in Chapter 7,
pooled interdependence means there is little interaction; sequential interdependence
means the output of one department goes to the next department; and reciprocal
interdependence means that departments mutually exchange materials and
information.16
Generally, as interdependence increases, the potential for conflict increases.17
In the case of pooled interdependence, units have little need to interact. Conflict
is at a minimum. Sequential and reciprocal interdependence require employees to
spend time coordinating and sharing information. Employees must communicate
frequently, and differences in goals or attitudes will surface. Conflict is especially
likely to occur when agreement is not reached about the coordination of services to
each other. Greater interdependence means departments often exert pressure for a
fast response because departmental work has to wait on other departments.18
Limited Resources. Another major source of conflict involves competition
between groups for what members perceive as limited resources. 19 Organizations
have limited money, physical facilities, staff resources, and human resources to share
among departments. In their desire to achieve goals, groups want to increase their
resources. This throws them into conflict. Managers may develop strategies, such
as inflating budget requirements or working behind the scenes, to obtain a desired
level of resources.
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
518
Part 5: Managing Dynamic Processes
Resources also symbolize power and influence within an organization. The
ability to obtain resources enhances prestige. Departments typically believe they
have a legitimate claim on additional resources. However, exercising that claim
results in conflict. Conflict over limited resources also occurs frequently among
government, nonprofit, and membership organizations. Consider the nations labor
unions, which are fighting each other these days for members and dues as much or
more than they are fighting corporate management. Branches of the U.S. military
are in conflict as they battle to keep their share of a shrinking defense budget.
IN PRACTICE
The U.S.
Military
Rational Versus Political Model
The sources of intergroup conflict are listed in Exhibit 13.2. The deg…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
