HR Strategies for the Int Manag

CONFLICT

Definition K.W.Thomas: “ A process that begins when one

party perceives that another party has negatively affected or is about to negatively affect something that the first party cares about”

FUNCTIONAL CONFLICT - supports the goals of the groups and improves its performance

DYSFUNCTIONAL CONFLICT - hinders group performance

THEORIES OF CONFLICT TRADITIONAL VIEW - conflict as harmful and

to be avoided Solution is therefore to look at causes of conflict

and correct these. HUMAN RELATIONS VIEW - conflict as natural

and inevitable Conflict must therefore be accepted

INTERACTIONIST APPROACH - some conflict as absolutely necessary for a group to perform effectively

Unitary & Pluralist Frames of Reference: Alan Fox

Unitary view: Firm as a family, team; Management expects undivided loyalty; assumes shared goals & anything different is blamed on the workers

Management view their actions as legitimate which can lead to problems with unions, assertions of authority

Management relies mainly on control & authority

Pluralist View A coalition of interests. Some sections of

the firm only partially loyal to the firm; conflict is inevitable and resistance to change is normal

Management can accept unions & conflict more easily

There is a plurality of power in organisations; power will be used to resolve conflict

Reasons for Dispute Disputes are internal, can be with outside

agencies and can be handled in very different ways

Where there is competition for resources, responsibilities, status, promotions, power

Strategies will differ depending on interest levels, changes in external environment eg competition, leadership, shareholders etc

Reasons continued The environment eg trust? Politics? Most stem from communication problems

and other interpersonal issues, for instance someone being left out of the communication loop, a misunderstanding, a personality clash.

Disputes are inevitable and in international organisations cultural and language differences will exacerbate the problems

Culture & Conflict Anglo cultures believe some level is necessary

to stimulate creativity and initiative (fits in with the philosophy of ‘doing’ and not just being’ - ‘self-development through doing’ cultures)

Tension when well-handled brings new energy/added value

Conflict beyond acceptable limits will be dealt with eg discipline, dismissal

Persons may be in conflict in one area and friendly in another; one needs to compartmentalise

Dispute in Collectivist Culture

‘Being’ cultures’ – see it as threatening harmony of group; disagreements not seen positively

Disputes in one area have repercussions in others Dispute is feared as it may destabilise status quo Hostile takeovers accepted in US but the systems

in Japan eg financial institutions are not in accord Eastern – e.g. Japan greater co-operation to reach

agreement Thai philosophy feels co-operation should be

encouraged much more

Disputes continued Disputes in collectivist countries exist

but are dealt with differently They develop strategies to minimise

threatening aspects of dispute. Mead says open dispute often dealt with by acceptance of latent dispute rather than ‘head on’

Studies & Theories Laurent’s work (’86) showed that 41%

Italian managers felt conflict should be eliminated, 27% French, 4% Swedish. Managers who wanted it eliminated felt threatened by perceived loss of authority eg bypassing line manager

Hofstede (2001 and earlier) – in collectivist societies harmony should be maintained

Hofstede

Collectivist cultures – maintain harmony/avoid direct confrontations

Individualistic cultures – speaking one’s mind= honest person

Collectivist – OPEN dispute discouraged – LATENT dispute tolerated appearance of harmony maintained Confrontation occurs if few risks

Theories continued In cultures where high UA is the norm,

disputes are seen as destabilising. High UA cultures – conflict highly undesirable,

emotionally disapproved of; low readiness to compromise with opponents

Low UA – conflict is natural, competition can be fair and right; greater readiness to compromise with opponents In low UA cultures, competition may be fierce but

reconciliation is usually achieved

Theories continued In masculine cultures, disputes are

often more overt; compromise and negotiation are valued in more feminine cultures

Masculine cultures – conflicts resolved by fighting them out

Feminine – resolved by compromise/ negotiation

Theories continued High PD – latent conflict between

ranks normal peers reluctant to trust each other

Low PD – harmony between powerful/ less valued

peers willing to co-operate

Tolerance Varies across cultures eg Mead’s example of

Thai office of an American manufacturing company. Competition amongst supervisors for manager’s position caused 3 supervisors to leave because of loss of face

Competition encourages new ideas but can be damaging to relationships

Conflict Argument can be constructive when info used

to resolve the situation, personal attacks are avoided; communication is full and accurate; differences are resolved

Conflict occurs when parties are unwilling to accept closure to the competition and argument

Reasons include no perception of common interest; arbitration is unsuccessful; the cost of losing is too high; personality clashes cannot be resolved

Resolving Conflicts Clarifying strategic priorities Flexible structures eg cross discipline teams Good communication systems; avoidance of

ambiguity Discourage personal attacks; concentrate

on the issues Appropriate procedures for dispute

resolution eg in accordance with the culture

Tactics for Dealing with Conflict

Co-operation – Work together to achieve common goals (not necessarily equal)

Collaboration – Parties to a conflict each try to satisfy the concerns of all parties

Avoidance – Ignore the conflict or the people with whom you disagree

Accommodation – One party self sacrifices

Compromise – No clear winners or losers

Culture & Resolution In Anglo cultures, managers must be

willing to confront problems; avoidance & appeasement may work but are normally seen as weakness

Japanese & Chinese more likely to try to resolve through compromise;interpersonal relationships much more important and help to resolve differences

Mediation A superior and an outsider may be asked to

mediate; both sides must accept the decision in advance

Usually try to negotiate so neither party wins everything or loses everything

Popular in collectivist countries eg Indonesia, Singapore

Exists in West but hasn’t been used extensively

Negotiation Every negotiation involves possible conflict

and co-operation eg mergers Negotiator needs to identify those points Sides need to decide what they are willing

to give on and what is their fall back line Is it a short term issue eg a sale or a long

term position eg a partnership?

Negotiation Tactics Where? Alternating? Neutral? When? Timing is critical and needs to

consider other business needs eg business peaks and deadlines; religious holiday? Is data available?

Who? Where trust high more info will be shared; if not, more proof needed

Ethical behaviour, trust, authority, respect, persuasion are important

Tactics continued How big a team? What disciplines needed?

US relies heavily on legal advice Asian countries may have more respect for

older negotiators In international deals, agents who are

more familiar with the culture may help in a good deal of the preparation and in briefing the team

Is someone with final authority to make a decision part of the team?

Outcome – S. Robbins Functional – Improves the quality of decisions;

stimulates creativity and innovations; environment of change; opposes the complacency of group think

Dysfunctional – Reduction in group cohesiveness; subordination of group goals to politicking; increased workload eg additional paperwork to cover themselves; stress, turnover of staff, job losses; failure of firm

Complexities in an International Firm

1. Strategic needs structure, goals, change 2. Complexity – structure, IT, H.O. versus

local; interdepartmental rivalry 3. H.O need for control over subsidiary 4. Size – Need for formality, lack of face to

face contact; time differences 5. Decision making; priorities; resources

H.O. or local?

Complexities continued

6. Different laws, norms, practices, ethical issues

7. Cultural Issues – eg Hofstede’s PD, UA 8. Staffing – Ex-pat vs local; skills; training 9. Salary Differentials – H.O. vs Ex-pat; ex-

pat vs local; loss of work 10. Isolation – Them & us