Intragroup and Intergroup Conflict

Intragroup and intergroup conflict Conflict ‘The struggle that arises when the goal directed behaviour of one person or group blocks the goal directed behaviour of another person or group’ Levels of conflict - Intrapersonal conflict Interpersonal conflict Intragroup conflict Intergroup conflict Interorganisational conflict Intragroup vs intergroup • • Intra-group conflict refers to conflicts within groups Inter-group conflict refers to conflicts between groups Perspectives on conflict - Traditional view: negative Avoid - Human relations view: inevitable Accept - Interactionist view: positive Promote Types of conflict 1) Functional – conflict supports the goals of the group and improves its performance 2) Dysfunctional – conflict hinders group performance Conflict intensity Outcomes Positive Neutral Negative Low Moderate Conflict Intensity The Conflict Process Antecedents of conflict • • • Differences in personality, values, functions Inadequate communication Status inconsistencies High • • • • • • • Overlapping authority and job boundaries Task interdependence Incompatible evaluation systems Scarcity of resources Unreasonable or unclear policies, standards, rules Organisational complexity (e.g. job specialisation) Decision making by consensus Current perspectives - Conflict in teams increases team performance … • on non-routine tasks • when conflict concerns tasks/processes - Conflict in team’s decreases team performance … • on routine tasks • when conflict concerns relationships Types of conflict 1) Relationship conflict - Emotional in nature - A perception of interpersonal incompatibility and typically includes tension, annoyance and animosity among team members 2) Task conflict - Cognitive in nature - A perception of disagreements among team members about the content of their decisions and involves differences in viewpoints, ideas and opinions 1) Relationship conflict 2) Task conflict The problem with conflict Dilemma: • • Task conflict has positive effects Relationship conflict has negative effects • Implication: Enhance task conflict and reduce relationship conflict. • BUT: relationship conflict and task conflict are highly related (r=.47). Towards a solution • Study 70 top management teams • Develop trust • Teams with low intra-group trust displayed much stronger positive associations between task and relationship conflict • High trust leads to more accurate attributions • Develop ‘loudness’ • Open expression of differing positions prevents those differences from festering into relationship conflict Conclusion: Trust is key to gaining the benefits of task conflict without suffering the costs of relationship conflict Evidence from meta-analysis Conflict management style: Cooperative or competitive Conflict management • • • • Employ win-win rather than win-lose negotiation strategies Discourage undesirable conflict Encourage desirable conflict (better constructive controversy) Recognize types and sources of conflict and implement appropriate conflict resolution and reduction strategies Conflict resolution techniques • • • • • Third party intervention Common task / super ordinate goal If possible: expand resources If possible: change structural variables Clarification of shared goals and values Effects of intergroup conflict • Negative • Between groups: Lack of communication and cooperation, decreases organisational effectiveness • Positive • Between groups: Innovation, higher quality decisions, increases organisational effectiveness • Fosters cohesion within groups Two perspectives on intergroup conflict A) Realistic conflict theory - Conflict between groups arises, because of incompatible goals (i.e. competition) - This leads to increased motivation and cohesion within groups… - …but leads to prejudiced attitudes, hostility, and discrimination between groups. - Emphasis on the compatibility of interests Sheriff’s summer camp study - Sample • Boys summer camp • N~24, aged around 12 years • Unacquainted - Design • Three studies • Three stage design • Group Formation • Competition • Cooperation Managing intergroup relations (From a RCT perspective) • Change the incentive system: intergroup rewards • Articulate super ordinate goals (effective team leadership) • Eliminate specific negative interactions • Provide well-defined tasks • Mediation/third party intervention if necessary Critique and empirical evidence • Competition is only to the detriment of inter-group relations when group members identify strongly with their group. • Studies using the minimal group paradigm (Tajfel, 1970), show that negative intergroup attitudes and behaviour may even emerge in the absence of conflicting goals/interests. B) Social identity theory • Individuals perceive others as well as themselves in terms of their group membership. • Group membership reflects on the self concept. • Thus, the status of the group also reflects on the self concept. • The status of the group is determined by social comparison with outgroups. • When the in-group has a higher status than the out-group, this reflects positively on the group member’s self concept. • Individuals want to feel good about themselves, therefore they tend to favour their in-group, and discriminate towards the out-group. • Leads to intergroup bias Intergroup bias: conditions and consequences • Conditions for intergroup biases to occur: • Identification with the group • Group membership has to be salient • Competitive settings accentuate, whereas cooperative attenuate group biases • • If boundaries are permeable, intergroup bias diminishes Consequences of intergroup bias: • In-group favouritism • Out-group discrimination • Conflict Managing intergroup relations From a Social Identity Perspective: • Breaking down group categorisations: • De-categorisation • Encourage frequent interaction (Contact Hypothesis) • Re-categorisation • Creating and emphasising shared organisational goals and rewards • Dual identification (organisation and group) • Job rotation • Common Vision New evidence on the effects of inter team conflict • • • Inter-team resource conflicts are generally thought to unite teams internally (in-group favouritism), thus reducing intra-team power struggles. However, conflict spill-over theory suggests that inter-team conflicts may also stimulate competitive power dynamics within teams, especially when a team is hierarchical (rather than egalitarian) A laboratory study of 85 three-person negotiation teams and a field study of 158 work teams, found that a resource-threatening interteam conflict promotes performance-detracting power struggles in hierarchical (but not egalitarian) teams.