Four Perspectives On Conflict Management: An Attributional .
Four Perspectives on Conflict Management:An Attributional Framework for OrganizingDescriptive and Normative Theory RALPH H. KILMANNUniversity of PittsburghKENNETH W. THOMASTemple UniversityDiverse explanatory conflict models and intervention strategies reflectkey perceptual/attributional choices. Two key choices are used as organizing devices to identify four broad perspectives upon conflict: external process, external structural, internal process, and internal structural. Diagnostic concepts and intervention strategies from the literature are summarized to illustrate each perspective.Qbservers have commented upon the disorganized state of organizational conflict literature(52, 78) and of conflict literature in general (30).This disorganization shows itself in divergentdefinitions of "conflict", fundamentally differentsets of explanatory variables, and recommendations of equally diverse strategies for managingconflict.As a sample of this diversity, "conflict" hasRalph H. Kilmann (Ph.D. - University of California, Los An-been defined as the condition of objective in-geles) is Associate Professor of Business Administration at thecompatibility b e t w e e n values Or goals (6), as t h eUniversity of Pittsburgh.behavior of deliberately interfering with anoth-Kenneth W. Thomas (Ph.D. — Purdue University) is AssociateProfessor of Industrial Relations and Organization Behaviorin the School of Business Administration, Temple University.: :' This article is based upon a paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, August 18-21,1974, in Seattle. The authors' names are in alphabetical orderto indicate the collaborative nature of this work.Received 6/25/76; Accepted 4/6/77, Revised T/5/77.59
«efour Perspectives on Conflict Management: An Attributional Frameworker's goal achievement (68), and emotionally interms of hostility (56). Descriptive theorists haveexplained conflict behavior in terms of objectiveconflict of interest (4), personal styles (10), reactions to threats (25), and cognitive distortions(57). Normative recommendations range overthe establishment of superordinate goals (71),consciousness raising (20), selection of compatible individuals (69), and mediating between conflict parties (83).This article attempts to organize the richnessand diversity of the organizational conflict literature so as to be useful to scholars and practitioners. Its approach is not to value one approachover another, explicitly or implicitly, but ratherto legitimize the value of different approachesby placing them in a larger perspective.Rather than a new conflict model, somethingmore encompassing is needed — a meta modelof conflict management. One meta model identifies two key assumptive or attributional choiceswhich run through the diversity of existing models. These assumptive choices are used as organizing principles to identify and differentiate fourbasic perspectives on conflict behavior. Thesefour perspectives are used as integrative mechanisms to identify commonalities which cutacross the diversity in conflict definitions, independent variables, and interventions. Each perspective is an equally important component ofconflict diagnosis and intervention, whetherconflict is between individuals, groups, or broader organizational subsystems.The scope of this meta model can be clarified by examining the steps involved in managinga conflict. Conflict management is viewed ascontaining three major interrelated events: (a)perceiving/experiencing unacceptable conflict,(b) diagnosing the sources of the conflict, and(c) intervening. These events are similar to thesequence of conflict management and plannedchange activities discussed by Robbins (63) andLippitt et al. (44) and to the events or stages inthe conflict models suggested by Pondy (59) andThomas (78). Within the conflict managementcycle, this article is not directly concerned withinitial judgment of the acceptability or dysfunctionality of a given conflict — for example,whether there is an optimal level of conflict (63)or whether a given conflict-handling behavior isfunctional in a given situation (79). These complex functionality issues deserve further explication elsewhere.This article addresses the subsequent causalattributions (40) involved in diagnosing sourcesof the conflict and anticipating the leverage ofdifferent interventions. The four perspectivesdeveloped are applicable regardless of why agiven conflict has been judged as dysfunctional— whether one would prefer to escalate or deescalate the conflict, to establish collaborationor heighten competition, etc. The specific interventions cited from the literature are slanted towards de-escalation and collaboration only because of the past emphasis within that literature(63).It is important to distinguish between (a) theprocess through which a theorist or interventionist diagnoses a conflict and selects an intervention, and (b) the resulting diagnosis and intervention strategy. The four perspectives areconcerned with the diagnosis and interventionstrategy, not the process of arriving at it — whichis necessarily an internal mental process. Thusthe process of diagnosis should not be confusedwith the content of the internal process perspective described later.Two Key Attributional ChoicesA review of the conflict literature suggestedthat much of its diversity could be accounted forin terms of two specific attributional distinctions.These two distinctions also seem to be importantattributional choices which theorists and practitioners make in trying to comprehend any behavioral phenomena.The First Distinction: Process vs.Structural Analyses Process and structural analyses appear to befundamentally different methods of perceiving
61Academy of Management Review - January 1978and understanding phenomena. Thomas' (78)synthesis of dyadic conflict theory underscoredthe distinction, assembling much of that literature into two separate process and structuralmodels of conflict behavior.Process models of behavior place the partiesin a temporal sequence of events. Behavior is assumed to be directly influenced by precedingevents and anticipation of subsequent events.Structural models focus upon conditions, relationships between those conditions, and theirinfluence upon behavior. At a given moment,those conditions are viewed as exerting forcesupon behavior. Whereas a process model placesparties in a sequence of events, a structural model places them in a web of forces.A series of verbal threats, acts of physical aggression, and an exchange of evaluative remarksare events. When these events, or a party's anticipation of them, are seen as influencing that party's behavior, the behavior is being explained inprocess terms. Conflict of interest, norms, beliefs, attitudes, and skills are conditions — thingswhich exist over a period of time. As such, theyare structural constructs for explaining behavior.The Second Distinction: internal vs. ExternalSources of InfluenceThis distinction refers to two different locifor the origins of behavior. "Internal" modelsemphasize events and conditions within a partywhich influence behavior. Parties are seen as decision-making entities confronted with alternatives and choice points. Variation in behavior isassumed to be an outcome of differences in theprocesses and structures of this decision making.By contrast, "external" models focus upon eventsand conditions outside the party which shapebehavior. As Bugental (15) notes, the implicit assumption is that parties are fairly interchangeable in their reactions to processes and conditionsin their environment — that these processes andconditions are sufficient to explain behavior.Rotter (65) found systematic variation among individuals in their tendencies to attribute behav'or to internal or external causes.Assumptions, perceptions, motives, insights,decision-making styles, and anticipating the other party's responses are phenomena which occur within a party, and are therefore internalconstructs for explaining behavior. Examples ofexternal constructs are conflicts of interest,norms, an opponent's threats, an opponent'sconcessions, and third-party interventions.The Four PerspectivesThese two distinctions combine logically toidentify four perspectives upon conflict, as represented in Figure 1: "external process", "external structural", "internal process", and "internalstructural". Although this scheme was developedindependently, it bears a strong resemblance tothe scheme used by Clark and Krone (18) toclassify their organization development interventions.Subsequent discussion of each perspectivewill focus on diagnosis and on intervention strategies. But the four perspectives also help to explain the divergence in definitions of "conflict"in the literature (30): as behavioral interference,threats, or competition (external process); asconflict of interest or objective role conflirt (external structure); as experienced frustration orthe intent to injure or to interfere with an opponent (internal process); or as personal incompatibilities and antagonistic attitudes or predispositions (internal structure).The External Process PerspectiveThis perspective emphasizes the causal effects of events which impinge upon a party fromoutside. A party's behavior is seen as a reactionto the behavior of other parties, in "stimulus-response" fashion, and this behavior in turnevokes a behavioral response from them.DiagnosisSources of conflictful behavior are soughtin other stimulus behaviors. More work needsto be done in classifying these behaviors and
Four Perspectives on Conflict Management: An Attributional Framewor62Process vs. Structure: Behavior is caused by . . . .Internal vs. External Sources ofconditions(Struaure)events(Process)Influence: Behavior is causedby events and c o n d i t i o n s . . . .The External Process Perspective The Exferna/Structura/ Perspective— behavior is shaped by events— behavior Is shaped by conditionsoutside the individual:outside the individual;threatsnegative evaluationencroachmentoutside the party(External)Intervention strategy:"Interaction management"social pressureconflict of interestproceduresIntervention strategy:"Contextual modification"The Internal Process Perspective The Internal Structural Perspective— behavior is shaped by events — behavior is shaped by conditionsinside the individual:inside the individual:frustrationstrategiesdefense mechanismsinside the party(Internal)Intervention strategy:"Consciousness raising"motivesattitudesskillsIntervention strategy:"Selection and training"FIGURE 1. The Two Distinctions which Define the Four Perspectives, with Some Examples ol KeyDiagnostic Variables and the Four Broad Intervention Strategies.Intervention: "lirteraction Management"tive is non-substantive in that the change agentis not especially concerned with the content ofthe interactions (i.e., the issues of the conflictsituation), but with specific behaviors used bythe parties in negotiating or otherwise attempting to influence each other.The class of interventions by which changeagents attempt to achieve this objective is termed"interaction management". 2 Change agentsSince the manner of interaction is seen asthe basis of the conflict, the change agent's focusis on changing interactions. This change objec-2 This term has nothing to do with the Interaction Manage-'ment Program produced by Development Dimensions, InPittsburgh.their effects. Conflict behavior has been assertedto be a response to competition (8, 41), threat(25), negative evaluation (34), encroachment (2),and coercion (62). Third party interventions alsomay be viewed as external events to which theparties react, as in process interventions discussed by Schein (66) and Walton (83).
63Academy of Management Review - January 1978may intervene directly into the interaction torontrol behavior by acting as "referee" to stopunfair behavior, rephrasing statements to makethem less provocative, acting as timekeeper andgatekeeper to insure equal time (83), and so on.They may also act as role models (3) to providean example of effective modes of interaction. Forexample, a change agent may purposely be nonevaluative and descriptive. The crucial nature ofthe intervention in this case is the change agent'stype of behavior. The parties may adopt similarbehavior through identification with the changeagent (58), thereby reducing defensiveness andfacilitating problem solving.The External Structural PerspectiveThe external structural perspective placesthe causes of behavior in conditions outside theparties. Conditions in the environment are seenas motivating, constraining, or channeling behavior.DiagnosisIn a review of the literature on organizational conflict, Thomas (78) identified three clusters of external conditions which influence conflict behavior — conflict incentives, social pressures, and rules and procedures."Conflict incentives" is used in a broadsense to include the objectives of the parties andthe manner in which satisfaaion of those objectives is linked. Two central components discussed have been the stakes involved (11, 29, 31)and the conflict of interest between goals of theconflict parties (4,23,68,71, 85).Social pressures can be viewed as barriers(83) and forces. Thomas (78) differentiated between pressures from constituents (9, 50, 74) andambient social pressure" — social pressure fromrelatively neutral onlookers who enforce thenorms of the larger organization (12, 45, 47) orculture (75).Finally, the conflict parties can be viewed asinteracting within a framework of rules and procedures which shape their negotiations — as wellas their opportunities to interfere with each other (68). The conflict behavior of the two partieshas been linked to several aspects of establishednegotiating procedures — frequency of contact(84), barriers to openness (54), formality (49), andsequencing of issues (11). Explicit decision rulesevolve to cover sensitive issues (28, 77). Variousforms of mediation or arbitration mechanismsmay be available when the parties deadlock (32,70,73).Intervention: "Contextual Modification"Change objectives focus upon alteration ofexternal conditions which exert forces upon theparties. Interventions which seek to alter this external context of the parties' behavior are labeled "contextual modification". Methods tochange the responsibilities of either party, formaland informal rules, job descriptions, incentives,budgets, control mechanisms, social pressures,etc., fit this category. These methods might include: (a) formally dictating a change in policyor goals of either or both parties, (b) mandatinga negotiation session between parties in whichthey have to compromise their budget demands,(c) changing the composition of members belonging to either or both parties, (d) changingthe social pressures which other bystanders exertupon the parties, and (e) instituting superordinate goals so that the parties benefit by cooperating with each other. Aspects of contextualmodification are now receiving increasing emphasis as the field of organizational behaviorleans more heavily toward organizational design(42,43).The Internal Process PerspectiveThis perspective seeks the source of behavior in the sequence of events which occurs within a party. In the case of individuals, behavior isseen as an outcome of the logic or "psychologic"(57) of perceptions, ideas, and emotions. Whereas the internal structural perspective emphasizesconsistencies and personal fixities, this perspective emphasizes the moment-to-moment changes
four Perspectives on Conflict Management: An Attributional Frameworkin the individual's phenomenology and thechoices which are made at any given moment.The individual is an ongoing process, rather thanan object with stable characteristics (15), a viewemphasized in humanistic psychology. Whenthe conflict party is a larger social unit (a workgroup or organization), this focus expands toinclude the ongoing interpersonal decisionprocesses within the unit which shap e its behavior toward other units.DiagnosisDiagnostic efforts center upon understanding the sequence of internal events which areshaping the conflict episode. In his processmodel, Thomas (78) emphasized the importanceof understanding the specific nature of the actual or anticipated frustrations which begin conflict episodes — i.e., the underlying concerns oragendas of the parties. That model also emphasized the importance of the parties' conceptualizations of the conflict situation — their definitions of the issues and their assumptions aboutpossible outcomes.The change agent operating from this persf ective will want to understand the strategicand tactical logic of each party. Parties may adoptpolitical strategies involving coalitions (15, 21,33), interpersonal strategies involving games orploys (7, 36, 60), bargaining strategies involvingpower (67) and so on. Occasionally violence maybe understood as a deliberate and rational tacticunder this perspective (55), although the partiesmay aiso realize the advantages of limiting ormanaging their conflict (19, 27).Less rational decision processes also are important from this perspective. Conflict behaviormay stem from misperceptions (9, 24), projection(35), selective attention and recall (22), polarization and stereotyping (57), and the inability torecognize alternatives (20).Intervention: "Consciousness Raising"Given the assumption that the parties' conflict behavior stems from their internal processingof decisions, the change agent's objective is toinfluence the parties' perceptions, cognitions,and emotions regarding the ongoing conflict.Such interventions are termed "consciousnessraising" interventions. Included are many traditional interventions used by the trainer of a sensitivity training group (13), where discussions of"here and now" experiences can lead to newappreciation of an ongoing interpersonal process, awareness of alternative behaviors and theireffects, correction of perceptual distortions, andworking-through of feelings. Also included areindividual or joint counseling sessions aimed athelping the parties to recognize their frustrationsand objectives, think through the consequencesof alternative paths, and work through ambivalences about a course of action (20).Although internal process or consciousnessraising interventions may result indirectly in altered modes of interaction between parties, decisions regarding external structural change, orlong-run changes in a party's internal structuring, these are not the primary objectives of aninternal process intervention. The primary objective is to improve the parties' internal processing of decisions regarding the current conflictepisode. Although the term "consciousnessraising" carries connotations of neutral activitiesintended only to bring some phenomenon intoawareness, these interventions may also involveadvocacy and persuasion. Nevertheless, consciousness-raising interventions tend to be themost humanistic, in the sense of treating the parties as responsible decision makers.The Internal Structural PerspectiveThis perspective seeks the causes of the parties' behavior in relatively stable characteristicswithin them, and in the manner in which thesecharacteristics are organized. The parties' behavior is viewed as an expression of their make-upThis "personality" or "organization" is seen as acompelling influence upon behavior, predisposing parties to characteristic patterns of behavior.
65Academy of Management Review - January 1978DiagnosisAn explanation of the general status of aparty's relationships with other parties is soughtin terms of the party's characteristics, whetherbased upon instinct (46), culture and socialization (75), or other factors.To some extent, a party's conflict-handlingbehavior may be seen in terms of habitual response hierarchies and styles (5, 10). Althoughtrait theories are not currently in vogue, someresearch evidence indicates a degree of re
a conflict. Conflict management is viewed as containing three major interrelated events: (a) perceiving/experiencing unacceptable conflict, (b) diagnosing the sources of the conflict, and (c) intervening. These events are similar to the sequence of conflict management and planned change
Functional vs Dysfunctional Conflict Functional Conflict- Conflict that supports the goals of the group and improves its performance Dysfunctional Conflict- Conflict that hinders group performance Task Conflict- Conflicts over content and goals of the work Relationship conflict- Conflict based on interpersonal relationships Process Conflict .
for conflict analysis. 2.1 Core analytical elements of conflict analysis . Violent conflict is about politics, power, contestation between actors and the . about conflict, see the GSDRC Topic Guide on Conflict . 13. Table 1: Guiding questions for conflict analysis . at conflict causes in Kenya in 2000. Actors fight over issues [, and .
Understand the importance of conflict resolution in teams and the workplace. Explain strategies for resolving or managing interpersonal conflict. Describe the causes and effects of conflict. Describe different conflict management styles, identify the appropriate style for different situations, and identify a preferred method of conflict resolution.
Conflict Management and Resolution Conflict Management and Resolution provides students with an overview of the main theories of conflict management and conflict resolution, and will equip them to respond to the complex phenomena of international conflict
2.3.1 Functional Conflict 2.3.2 Dysfunctional Conflict 2.3.3 Task versus Relationship Conflict 2.4 CAUSES OF CONFLICT 2.5 INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION AND INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT 2.6 WORKPLACE DIVERSITY AND CONFLICT 2.6.1 Different Categories of Workplace Diversity 2.6.2 Cultural Diversity 2.6.3 Measuring Diversity
Tradition vs. Modernity 21 V. Escalation and Access to Conflict Resources 22 The Clan System as a Conflict Multiplier (and Positive Social Capital) 22 The Precarious Situation of Youth 23 Information and Misinformation 24 VI. Available Conflict Management Resources 25 Traditional Conflict Management Mechanisms and Social Capital 25 State Conflict Management Mechanisms 27 The Role of Religion .
Unit 2.4 The difference between Conflict and Violence 15 Unit 2.5 What conflicts can do 17 Module Three: Conflict Analysis 19 Unit 3.1 Introduction to Conflict analysis 19 Unit 3.3 Levels of Conflict Escalation 20 Unit 3.2 Tools for analysing Political Conflicts 21 Module Four: Intervention in a political Conflict. 25 Unit 4.1 Criteria for .
RUSSIAN LANGUAGE The Honour course in Russian aims to develop a good active and passive command of correct spoken and written Russian for non-technical purposes, with some appreciation of different stylistic registers. This is done by means of regular obligatory classes in translation to and from Russian, instruction in writing essays in Russian, grammar classes as needed, and classes allowing .
