Conflicten en onderhandelingen

Presentatie over: "Conflicten en onderhandelingen"— Transcript van de presentatie:

1 Conflicten en onderhandelingen
Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

2 Leerdoelen Een definitie te geven van conflict
Onderscheid te maken tussen de traditionele visie op conflicten, de visie van de human-relationsbeweging en die van het interactionisme Functionele en disfunctionele conflicten te vergelijken Het conflictproces te beschrijven Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

3 Leerdoelen De vijf methoden voor de aanpak van conflicten te noemen
Distributief en integratief onderhandelen met elkaar te vergelijken Blinde vlekken te noemen die onderhandelingen in de weg staan Aan te geven hoe individuen beter kunnen onderhandelen Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

4 Een definitie van conflict
waarnemen tegenstand schaarste obstructie onverenigbaarheid Conflict can be defined as a process in which an effort is purposely made by “A” to offset the efforts of “B” by some form of blocking that will result in frustrating “B” in attaining his or her goals or furthering his or her interests. This definition is comprised of five elements. Conflict must be perceived by the parties to it. If there is no awareness, then no conflict exists. Additional elements are opposition, scarcity, and blockage and the assumption that there are two or more parties whose interests or goals appear to be incompatible. Resources are limited, and scarcity encourages blocking behavior. The parties, therefore, are in opposition. And when one party blocks another’s means to a goal, conflict exists. There is debate over whether conflict is limited to only overt acts. The above definition assumes that conflict is a determined action, which can exist at either the latent or overt level. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

5 Verschillende ideeën over conflicten
De traditionele visie Verschillende ideeën over conflicten De visie van de human- relationsbeweging The traditional view of conflict has argued that it must be avoided because it indicates a malfunction in the group. Conflict was viewed negatively as being synonymous with violence, destruction, and irrationality. The view that all conflict is bad is simplistic. To improve group or organizational performance, all we need to do is address the causes of conflict and correct them. Although strong evidence disputes this view, many use it to evaluate conflict. The human relations view argues that conflict is a natural, inevitable outcome in any group. Since conflict is inevitable, it should be accepted. And there are even times when conflict may benefit the performance of a group. This view dominated conflict theory from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s. The current approach is the interactionist view. It encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious, peaceful, tranquil, cooperative group is likely to become static and apathetic--unable to respond to the challenges of the global marketplace. The major contribution of this approach is to urge group leaders to maintain an ongoing minimal level of conflict--enough to keep the group alive, self-critical, and creative. De interactionistische visie Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

6 Conflicten Functionele conflicten Disfunctionele conflicten
Not all conflict is productive. Functional conflict supports the goals of the group and improves its performance. Dysfunctional conflict hinders group performance. The line between the two types of conflict is neither clear nor precise. Therefore, no one level of conflict can be identified as acceptable or unacceptable under all conditions. Conflict that may facilitate the goals of one group may debilitate another group. The important criterion is group performance. It is the impact of conflict on the group as a whole that defines functionality. In an appraisal of either the functional or dysfunctional impacts of conflict on group behavior, whether the individual group members perceive the conflict as good or bad is irrelevant. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

7 Het conflictproces Fase 1 Potentiële tegenstand Fase 2 Bewustwording
en personalisatie Fase 3 Gedrag Fase 4 Uitkomsten Waarge- nomen conflict Betere groeps- prestaties Voorafgaande condities: - communicatie - structuur - persoonlijke variabelen Openlijk conflict Slechtere groeps- prestaties Ervaren conflict Gedrag om conflicten te hanteren: - competitie - samenwerking - aanpassing - vermijding - compromis The conflict process has four stages: potential opposition, personalization and cognition, behavior, and outcomes. The first step is the presence of several conditions that can cause conflict: communication, structure, and personal variables. Miscommunication can be caused by semantics, “noise” in the communication channels, and misunderstandings. Structure includes variables such as size; degree of specialization and standardization of tasks; heterogeneity of the group; leadership styles; reward systems; and the degree of dependence between groups. The most important personal variables are individual value systems, idiosyncrasies, and differences. If the conditions cited in Stage I generate frustration, then the perception of conflict exists in Stage II. But just because conflict is perceived, it is not necessarily personalized. It is at the level where the conflict is felt that parties experience tension, anxiety, frustration, or hostility. In Stage III, one person acts to frustrate or prevent the attainment of the goals or interests of another person. This action must be intended. At this juncture, conflict is overt and covers a full range of behaviors--from subtle, indirect, and controlled conflict to direct, aggressive, or violent struggle. At this stage, most conflict-handling behaviors are initiated. Five approaches are typical: competition, collaboration, avoidance, accommodation, and compromise. In stage VI, the interplay between overt conflict behavior and conflict-handling behaviors results in consequences. These consequences may be functional, if the conflict has increased the performance of the group. Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions, stimulates creativity and innovation, encourages interest and curiosity among group members, enables the release of tensions, and fosters self-evaluation and improvement. Or the consequences may be dysfunctional if they decrease the performance of the group by retarding communication, reducing cohesiveness, and fostering in-fighting at the expense of the goals of the group. At the extreme, conflict can threaten the survival of the group. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

8 Distributief versus integratief onderhandelen
Kenmerk onderhandeling Distributief onderhandelen Integratief onderhandelen Hoeveelheid te verdelen middelen Primaire motivatie Primaire belangen Termijn van relatie Staat vast Ik win, jij verliest Tegenstrijdig Korte termijn Variabel Ik win, jij wint Convergent of congruent Lange termijn Two negotiation methods are distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining. When negotiating the price of a used car, the buyer and seller are engaged in distributive bargaining. This type of bargaining is a zero-sum game: any gain that one party makes comes at the expense of the other party. So, the essence is negotiating over who gets what share of a fixed pie. The next technique assumes that more than one “win-win” settlement exists. Generally preferable to distributive bargaining, integrative bargaining builds long-term relationships because each negotiator can leave the table feeling victorious. For integrative bargaining to succeed, negotiators must be open, candid, sensitive, trusting, and flexible. All things being equal, integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive bargaining. The former builds long-term relationships and facilitates future cooperation. The latter, on the other hand, leaves one party a loser; so it can build animosities and deepen divisions when people have to work together on an ongoing basis. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

9 Blinde vlekken in de besluitvorming die effectieve onderhandelingen in de weg staan
Irrationele escalatie van betrokkenheid De mythe van de taartpunten Het anker uitgooien De presentatie van onderhandelingen Beschikbaarheid van informatie De nederlaag van de winnaar Te veel zelfvertrouwen Irrational escalation of commitment occurs when people continue a previously selected course of action beyond what rational analysis would recommend. Such misdirected persistence can waste a great deal of time, energy, and cash. The mythical fixed pie. Bargainers assume that their gain must come at the expense of the other party. By assuming a “zero-sum game” they exclude any opportunities for finding “win-win” solutions. Anchoring and adjustments. People often anchor their judgments on irrelevant information, such as initial offers. Effective negotiators do not let an initial anchor minimize the amount of information and depth of analysis they use to evaluate a situation. Framing negotiations. People are affected by the way information is presented to them. Availability of information. Negotiators often rely too much on information that is readily available while ignoring more relevant data. They should learn to distinguish between what is familiar and what is reliable and relevant. The winner’s curse is the regret one feels after negotiation. Since your offer was accepted by your opponent, you become concerned that you offered too much. You can reduce the “curse” by getting as much information as possible and putting yourself in your opponent’s shoes. Overconfidence. When people hold certain beliefs and expectations, they tend to ignore any information that contradicts them. The result is that negotiators tend to be overconfident, which can lessen the incentive to compromise. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

10 Onderhandelen De rol van de Cultuurverschillen persoonlijkheid bij bij
onderhandelingen Cultuurverschillen bij onderhandelingen Overall assessments of the personality-negotiation relationship assert that personality traits have no direct effect on either the bargaining process or the negotiation outcomes. This suggests that concentrating on the issues and the situational factors is more productive than concentrating on the characteristics of an opponent. Cultural backgrounds do seem to be relevant, and negotiating styles can vary significantly among national cultures. Therefore, the cultural context of the negotiation significantly influences (1) the amount and type of preparation for bargaining, (2) the relative emphasis on task versus interpersonal relationships, (3) the tactics used, and (4) where the negotiations should be conducted. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12

11 Onderhandelings-vaardigheden verbeteren
Verdiep je in de tegenpartij Begin met een positieve opening Laat de persoon van de ander buiten de onderhandelingen Besteed niet te veel aandacht aan zijn openingsbod Benadruk win-win oplossingen Schep een open sfeer van vertrouwen The following recommendations should help to improve your effectiveness as a negotiator: 1. Research your opponent to acquire as much information as you can about his or her interests and goals. Such knowledge will help you to understand behavior, predict responses to offers, and frame solutions. 2. Begin with a positive overture because research shows that concessions tend to be reciprocated. 3. Address the problem, not personalities. Avoid the tendency to attack your opponent. Separate people from problems; don’t personalize differences. 4. Pay little attention to initial offers. Because everyone has an initial position which tends to be extreme and idealistic, treat initial offers as points of departure. 5. Emphasize “win-win” solutions. Look for an integrative solution. Frame options in terms of your opponent’s interests and look for solutions that will allow both of you to declare victory. 6. Create an open, trusting climate. Ask questions, listen actively, and avoid defensiveness or inappropriate wording. Doing so will help to create a climate that is conducive to an integrative settlement. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 12