Nova Southeastern University

NSUWorks

CAHSS Faculty Articles Faculty Scholarship

Summer 7-19-2013

Understanding Conflict Management Systems and Strategies in

the Workplace: A Pilot Study
Neil H. Katz
Nova Southeastern University, kneil@nova.edu

Linda T. Flynn
Nova Southeastern University

Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/shss_facarticles

Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons, and the Communication Commons

NSUWorks Citation
Katz, N. H., & Flynn, L. T. (2013). Understanding Conflict Management Systems and Strategies in the
Workplace: A Pilot Study. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 30 (4), 393-410. https://doi.org/10.1002/
crq.21070

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at NSUWorks. It has been
accepted for inclusion in CAHSS Faculty Articles by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more
information, please contact nsuworks@nova.edu.
 A RT IC L E S

t i c l e s Understanding Conflict Management

Systems and Strategies in the Workplace:
A Pilot Study

Neil H. Katz
Linda T. Flynn

In today’s business environment, workplace conflict is a significant issue.

Research in the conflict management discipline says that conflict in the
workplace is on the rise and will continue to go up; however, many
leaders and managers are not fully aware of structures and processes
available to manage it. This article presents the results of a pilot study
conducted in Broward County, Florida, of workplace leaders’ and man-
agers’ awareness, perception, and use of conflict management systems
and strategies. The findings reflect the lack of a clear definition of the
issue, the absence of integrated conflict management systems within
most organizations, and dissatisfaction with antiquated grievance sys-
tems. There is substantial opportunity for additional research.

N onviolent, collaborative conflict resolution methods such as facilita-

tion, negotiation, mediation, and consensual decision making are
part of a long history in many regions of the globe, including sub-Sahara
Africa, India, Iceland, and the Roman Empire. However, these proven con-
flict resolution methods were not well known in the United States until the
1980s, when developments in various areas converged to expose these
methods to a wider audience. Among the most important of these initia-
tives were widely popular books such as Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agree-
ment without Giving In (Fisher, Ury, and Patton 1981) and The Mediation
Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflicts (Moore 2003); national

Conflict Resolution Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 4, Summer 2013 393

© Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the Association for Conflict Resolution
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21070
394 KATZ, FLYNN

organizations providing conferences and networking services, including

the National Conference on Peacemaking and Conflict Resolution; and
institutes such as the Theory and Practice Research and Educational Cen-
ters funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, including uni-
versity centers such as the Harvard Negotiation Project, the Program for
the Analysis and Resolution of Conflicts at Syracuse University’s Maxwell
School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, and the Dispute Resolution Pro-
gram at the Kellogg Business School of Northwestern University.
Throughout the 1990s, interest in collaborative conflict resolution
techniques continued to accelerate in academia, training organizations,
and numerous sectors of society such as business, education, family, and
religious institutions. Substantial support of these methods existed among
people and institutions of great influence, including the US Congress,
which passed the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act in 1990 authoriz-
ing and encouraging federal agencies to use alternative dispute resolution
(ADR), and the presidency: In 1993, President Bill Clinton signed Execu-
tive Order 12891 mandating that all US federal agencies form labor-
management partnership councils and undergo training in interest-based
negotiation, as well as other conflict resolution and collaborative decision-
making methods.
By the late 1990s, hundreds of colleges and universities and training
organizations offered theory and practice in conflict resolution techniques:
facilitation, negotiation, advanced communication skills, conflict and com-
munication styles, and mediation and arbitration. Prominent private sector
firms such as General Electric, Prudential, Johnson and Johnson, and Alcoa
were developing in-house mediators, arbitrators, ombudspersons, and other
conflict resolution specialists. Large federal agencies such as the US Postal
Service, the Department of the Interior, and the Departments of the Navy
and Air Force trained many of their own employees to become ADR special-
ists. These trained staff handled cases of workplace conflict effectively and
efficiently in terms of cost, settlement satisfaction, durability of the agree-
ment, and overall satisfaction with the process (Lipsky and Seeber 2006).
By the turn of the century, optimism that these dispute resolution
practices were becoming the norm in communities, groups, families, and
workplaces took hold among many scholars and practitioners. William
Ury’s The Third Side (2000) promotes the belief and promise that nego-
tiation will take over as the norm in settling international disputes, with
military interventions becoming more and more obsolete. Jack Gordon’s

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 395

The Pfeiffer Book of Successful Conflict Management Tools (2003) gives

readers access to dozens of ideas, strategies, inventories, questionnaires,
surveys, and experiential learning activities to manage conflict more
effectively at the individual, team, and organizational levels.
In a major study of private sector workplace conflict systems by schol-
ars of the prestigious Institute of Conflict Resolution at Cornell Universi-
ty’s School of Labor and Industrial Relations, Lipsky, Seeber, and Fincher
(2003) noted the broadening acceptance and institutionalization of pro-
cesses such as mediation, arbitration, fact finding, and ombudspersons and
wrote, “Research strongly suggests that ADR is firmly institutionalized in
a majority of United States corporations, at least for employment and com-
mercial disputes” (xvii). The Cornell study authors optimistically con-
cluded their book by referring to Malcolm Gladwell’s Tipping Point (2002)
phenomenon to characterize the incredible growth and bright future for
conflict management practices in the workplace. The authors predicted
that “growth will get to social and behavioral epidemic proportions where
‘everyone will be doing it’ and conflict management processes and systems
will become as essential to organizational life as other features of Human
Resources such as benefits, compensation and hiring” (139–40).
This article summarizes the results of a pilot study conducted in Bro-
ward County, Florida, designed to gauge the awareness, perception, and
use of conflict management methods and systems. The study findings, of
a mixed-method design, highlight the results of in-depth interviews with
leaders from a cross-section of public, private, and nonprofit organiza-
tions and employee surveys from those organizations. The study gathered
leader and employee views of workplace conflict, perceived value of the
systems, and awareness of and satisfaction with existing conflict resolution
practices, including how the system “consciously or unconsciously exposes
and resolves dissatisfaction” (Constantino and Merchant 1996, 22). The
results of this study, funded under a local grant requiring a community
engagement focus in Broward County, cannot easily be generalized to a
larger population. The pilot study findings do, however, reveal some
important challenges for consideration by scholars and practitioners,
including a distinct lack of awareness of the value of effective conflict
management systems and strategies, a potential need for the conflict man-
agement field to improve public education and communications with
business communities, and identification of areas for future research and
exploration.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

396 KATZ, FLYNN

Work and Conflict: Yesterday and Today

To provide a context for the study, we provide a brief review of the litera-
ture, which lends evidence to the belief that workplace conflict is a signifi-
cant variable in workplace productivity, effectiveness, and overall success.
Scholarship on workplace conflict has experienced several transforma-
tions. While early twentieth-century classical organizational theorists such
as Max Weber and Henri Fayol viewed organizational conflict as unpleas-
ant, hostile, and senseless (Alghamdi 2011), most scholars today recognize
the inevitability of workplace conflict, defined as “members engaging in
activities that are incompatible with those of colleagues within their net-
work, members of other collectivities, or unaffiliated individuals who utilize
the services or products of the organization” (Roloff 1987, 19). Moreover,
contemporary theorists, including Taylor (1992), and Rahim (2001), Lam
(2005), Wilmot and Hocker (2007), and Ritzer (2008), not only admit the
inevitability of conflict as a natural occurrence in organizational life but also
argue that conflict can serve a positive function in the workplace environ-
ment. The human relations and interactionist perspective places the empha-
sis on how conflicts are managed as the critical element in determining if
they have a negative or positive effect on the workplace environment. Con-
flict management “involves designing effective strategies to minimize the
dysfunctions of conflict and enhancing the constructive functions of con-
flict in order to enhance the learning and effectiveness of an organization”
(Rahim 2001, 76) and developing macrolevel strategies to lower dysfunc-
tional conflict and improve functional conflict (Ozkalp, Sungur, and
Ozdemir 2009). Functional conflict flows from the skillful management of
substantive disagreements between organizational members, resulting in
stronger group performance through better understanding of different per-
spectives and solutions. Dysfunctional or affective conflict “emerges as a
strain or breakdown in interpersonal relationships leading to hurt feelings
and emotions of anger and betrayal, and takes its toll on group and organi-
zational loyalty, performance, satisfaction and commitment” (Jehn 1995;
Rahim 2001, 2002; Wang, Jing, and Klossek 2007; Alghamdi 2011).
Today’s organizations deal with high levels of workplace conflict result-
ing from differences in human relations, confusing organizational structures,
competition among members and units for scarce resources, budget cuts,
employee layoffs, job expansion, and global competition. Groups and
organizations experience increased interdependence among stakeholders,
and more demanding and complex work assignments. These challenges

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 397

accelerate the need to work more often in teams and task forces and the neces-
sity of success in networking, partnerships, and critical alliances. Demanding
customers and clients, employee differences, and employee desire for more
participation in decision making also heighten tensions in the workplace.
Several studies document that senior and middle-level managers and supervi-
sors spend 21 to 42 percent of their time dealing with conflict as a primary
party or as a third party (Thomas and Schmidt 1976; Watson and Hoffman
1996; Dana 2001). Other studies conclude that over half of supervisors’ and
managers’ workdays are spent engaging in back-and-forth communication
trying to reach agreement and collaboration among horizontal and vertical
stakeholders and constituents (O’Leary and Van Slyke 2010).

Conflict and the Workplace

Ample evidence exists that workplace conflict that is not handled well has
heavy direct and indirect costs for employers, employees, and organiza-
tional effectiveness and efficiency. Research notes that more performance
problems result from strained relationships than from deficits in skills or
motivation. Dana’s (2001) exit interview data document that 50 percent
or more of voluntary resignations relate directly to unresolved conflict and
show that “conflict is a decisive factor in at least 90% of involuntary ter-
minations excluding cases of staff reduction due to downsizing, mergers
and restructuring” (22). Additional studies more specifically document
the psychological effects of unmanaged conflict due to hostile work envi-
ronments (Bloom 2006). As organizations become conscious of costs and
bottom-line calculations, attention must be directed to conflict manage-
ment systems and strategies. Dana (2001) proclaims, “The means by
which organizations manage conflict might very well be one of the most
significant factors they currently face in regards to costs, efficiency, effec-
tiveness and employee retention” (see http://www.mediationworks.com).
Organizational conflict is experienced at all organizational levels and
results from many procedural and personnel issues (Hovtepo, Assokere,
Abdul-Azeez, and Ajemunighbohun 2010). Data on the causes of conflict
range from the obvious—lack of resources, poor communication, compe-
tition, power abuses, and salary/rewards comparisons and dissatisfaction—
to less obvious causes such as ambiguous reporting lines and unclear
expectations, extreme behavior regulation, and subtle cultural differences
(Arops and Beye 1997; Hovtepo et al. 2010). In summary, scholars note
three key elements influencing conflict manifestations:

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

398 KATZ, FLYNN

• Power—the capability and the means to accomplish things

• Organization demands—differing expectations of work duties,
quality, and speed
• Worth—self-esteem and other emotional needs

Each of these is highly relational and interdependent, affecting the

kinds and intensity of conflict in work settings (Arops and Beye 1997).

The Role of Culture and Leadership

Although a comprehensive exploration of the relationship of leadership

style, organizational culture, and conflict management systems and strate-
gies is beyond the scope of this article and the pilot study, a brief acknowl-
edgment of their importance in workplace conflict procedures and practices
is necessary.
Organizational culture is key to influencing conflict management sys-
tems and strategies. Several studies make a compelling case that organiza-
tional culture is one of the most important variables in organizational
success. Organizational culture is defined as “a pattern of shared basic
assumptions—invented, discovered or developed by a given group as it
learns to cope with its work of external adaptation and internal integration
that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be
taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in
relation to those problems” (Schein 2010, 18). Since culture is a “shared
set of values, beliefs, norms, attitudes, behavior and social structures that
define reality and guide everyday interactions” (Ford 2001, 2), its impact
on the organization and its members is profound. More specifically, the
overall culture affects fundamental parts of the organization, including
“how the organization is structured, role expectations, how to act on the
job, how to solve problems, who makes decisions under varying circum-
stances, job descriptions, how to think about and behave towards co-workers,
and supervisory and industry norms and practices encompassing such
beliefs and practices on issues of diversity, openness to feedback, and on-
going learning” (Bates et al. 1995, 1568). Indeed, the subculture of con-
flict is a critical dimension of the overall organizational culture.
Closely related to the role of organizational culture in influencing con-
flict dynamics are the critical variables of leadership style, behavior, and
perception. In particular, Argyris and Schön (1974) noted the important

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 399

distinction between espoused theory and theory in use. Their research explores
the gap between leaders’ espoused theory, which is the worldview and val-
ues people give allegiance to and proclaim to others that they believe gov-
erns their behavior, and theory in use, the worldview and values implied
and witnessed by their behavior that actually predict and govern their
actions. The wider the gap is, the more the likelihood is of potential con-
flict issues between leaders and their employees.

The Broward County Pilot Study

The impacts of workplace conflict have been widely studied (Ury 1993;
Ury 2000; Cloke and Goldsmith 2005). Research shows that unresolved
conflict represents one of the most significant costs in many businesses, yet
it remains largely unrecognized (Dana 2001).
This study seeks to understand the use of conflict management in the
workplace by uncovering workplace managers’ and leaders’ perceptions
and attitudes of the field and its offerings. Our research objectives were to
gauge the current state of conflict and conflict management systems within
a designated business community and evaluate the awareness and percep-
tion of conflict management strategies. In addition, the study lends some
evidence to the importance of the close relationship of organizational cul-
ture, leadership, and conflict in an organization, an area that warrants addi-
tional research as a full analysis is beyond the scope of this pilot study.
Our main preliminary assumption is that the awareness and popularity
of conflict management systems is low. Secondarily, there is little or no
awareness of what an effective conflict management system model, includ-
ing relevant tools, training, and resources in the community, consists of.

Methodology
The research team used a qualitative and quantitative mixed design for data
gathering. It identified participating organizations in partnership with
United Way of Broward County and the Greater Fort Lauderdale Broward
Economic Development Alliance located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
Organizations were contacted through an introduction from a community
partner, a follow-up e-mail from the principal investigator, and subsequent
telephone calls for scheduling interviews. All participants received full
informed-consent forms adhering to Nova Southeastern University’s Insti-
tutional Review Board standards. The sample included a cross section of

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

400 KATZ, FLYNN

public, private, and nonprofit organizations in Broward County, ranging

in size ranged from twenty to over two thousand employees.
The team conducted twenty-five interviews with C-level executives and
other high-level managers using a series of open-ended questions based on
the following subject areas:

• The interviewee’s definition of organizational conflict

• The current state of issues and disputes within the organization and
with the client or customer base
• The use of techniques to manage and resolve disputes
• The perceived and real effect of disputes on the productivity and effi-
ciency of participants and subordinates
• Any current or past training within areas of conflict management
• Satisfaction with current conflict management systems
• The overall effect on the organization—its turnover rates, sabotage,
slowdowns, and direct costs
• Awareness of resources and training for managing conflict

Subsequent to the review and analysis of the qualitative interview data,

ten of twenty-five organizations consented to distribution of a survey to their
general employee base. The survey design, based on Dana’s (2001) work-
place conflict survey, investigates satisfaction with conflict management in
the organization, the types of conflict, and behavioral reaction to conflict
in the workplace. The 219 completed surveys represented a 60 percent
response rate based on consenting organization employee counts.

Results Summary
Within the geographically restricted sample, we made the following findings:

• There is little awareness of how much conflict affects an organization’s

performance and finances.
• The types of conflicts are varied.
• Leaders and employees hold differing definitions of conflict and views
on the effectiveness of any systems in place.
• There is little awareness of the tools and strategies available to mitigate
conflict in the workplace.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 401

Another finding points to the importance of leadership style and orga-

nizational culture in effectively managing conflict.
The types of conflicts within organizations are broad-based and diverse.
With today’s economic climate, both nonprofits and private sector organi-
zations face serious financial challenges, and these effects of the economy
result in increased workload, uncertain job security, and employees who
are dealing with high stress situations, which sometimes translates to addi-
tional internal organizational conflict. In ranking the types of conflict in
the workplace, the surveyed employees attributed disagreements in the fol-
lowing ranked order:

1. Employee-employee issues
2. Employee-manager/supervisor issues
3. Employee-client issues
4. Manager-client issues

Broward County is the most racially diverse county in South Florida:

according to the 2010 Census, 37 percent of the population belongs to a
minority group. Many organizations with diverse employee populations
identify cultural and generational differences as a basis for conflict. Since
the demographics of Broward (and other areas of the country) are diverse,
so is the workplace. For example, due to many economic and demographic
variables, more and more workplaces have older and younger generations
working together. Other types of conflicts are rooted in differing commu-
nication styles, lack of communication between management and employ-
ees, interpersonal disagreements, and a lack of effective conflict management
training and systems. In addition, the team observed distinct differences
between the nonprofit sector organizations and private sector organiza-
tions, with nonprofit cultures being closely aligned with the mission and
vision of their organization. Nonprofit leaders discussed their experiences
with turnover rates that are higher than those in private sector organiza-
tions. Leaders attribute this higher rate to higher emotional stress since the
employees of nonprofits tend to deal with vulnerable populations. After a
time, it takes a toll and can result in more interpersonal conflict with others
or a desire to self-preserve by leaving the organization.
Many organizations in the study had a formal grievance process or an
unwritten grievance process. Of the organizations with conflict manage-
ment systems, 21 percent of the employees and managers stated they were

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

402 KATZ, FLYNN

not aware of any such systems in their organizations. Only 36 percent of

employees surveyed were satisfied with the way their organization manages
conflict.
The most common formal grievance systems were standard processes of
completing a grievance form, submitting it to a supervisor, and waiting for
a response or an escalation of the grievance to a higher level in the organiza-
tion. Organizations have these systems in place, although they often choose
to resolve the majority of conflicts informally to avoid a long formal pro-
cess. According to many leaders and employees, the formal systems are
likely to cause more conflict than resolve it due to the lengthy, arduous,
complicated path to resolution and the likely win-lose outcome. Large and
small organizations alike tend to use outside services for employee conflict,
including human resource consultant services, employee assistance pro-
gram services, and legal counsel services for serious situations. The larger
organizations have legal staff on-site, while the smaller organizations may
hire outside counsel as needed.
The research team did not predefine conflict for the interview partici-
pants but rather asked the participants about their definition of it. Not
surprisingly, leaders held varying definitions of conflict. Some defined it
very narrowly as a dispute between employees or managers and employees.
Some indicated a conflict is a serious issue in the workplace, whereas a
dispute is minor and not considered a conflict. A few held a broader view
and considered conflict anything they intervened in and mitigated in a
given day: employee-employee disputes, employee-supervisor disputes,
supervisor-supervisor disputes, financial controversies, board relationships,
client-employee relations, and community relations. Employees also held
different views of what is considered conflict in the workplace.
As a result, the differences in how people define conflict can be a root
cause of conflict. For example, one leader shared a story about a genera-
tional conflict in her workplace. An older worker lodged a complaint with
a supervisor against a younger worker for “disrespecting” her in the work-
place. The stated cause was that the younger worker did not consistently
greet the older worker in the hallway when they crossed paths. The older
worker perceived this as disrespectful, and it subsequently led to various
confrontations with an escalation of the conflict. The younger worker could
not understand why the older worker was upset: her perception was that if
she greeted everyone once during the day, there was no need to greet each
other each time they passed in the hallway. The supervisor receiving this
complaint refused to take it seriously because she did not view it as a real

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 403

conflict. Bur eventually the relationship between the two workers became so
volatile that it affected others in the workplace. Finally, the leader stepped in
and held meetings with the employees and the supervisor. Through conver-
sation and dialogue, the root of the problem surfaced: a difference in greet-
ing protocols between generations and the perception of what constitutes a
valid conflict.
During the interviews, leaders were asked how much time was spent on
conflict in the organization in a given day. The answer to this question
seemed to be influenced by how each interviewee defined conflict, although
reported time spent on conflict was high even with varying definitions. Lead-
ers stated they spent approximately three to four hours a day (38 percent of
a total work week) on conflict. One leader described her job as full-time
conflict management, emphasizing that any high-level management job is
primarily about managing conflict within an organization.
Throughout the interview process, these conversations about conflict in
themselves resulted in increased awareness by the leaders of the time and
money spent on conflict in their organization. None of the organizations
had ever attempted to estimate the cost of conflict within their organization.

Connections: Leadership and Culture

The research team, which entered this study with a focus on investigating
systems, processes, and procedures that organizations used to manage con-
flict, observed a distinct link between leadership style, organizational cul-
ture, and the type of systems used and the perceptions of effective conflict
management. The level of conflict in an organization in relation to leader-
ship and culture was not directly measured in this study, although it is a
recommended area for future research.
As expected, nonprofit and private sector organizations operate in very
different cultures. Every nonprofit organization attempts to have its leaders
and employees closely aligned with the mission and vision of the organiza-
tion. Almost unanimously, the mission and vision was the first subject of
conversation in these interviews. In addition, many organizations align their
conflict management policies with their mission and vision. For instance, one
organization serves community populations dealing with mental and physi-
cal abuse. In the interview, the leader explained that it has a zero-tolerance
policy for any physical or mental abuse among employees, no matter how
insignificant. The leader told the story of an employee who threw a pen
toward another employee during a meeting and was immediately terminated.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

404 KATZ, FLYNN

In another organization, the same behavior may not be interpreted as a seri-

ous offense, but in this organization, the action represented everything it
protects their client populations from in their daily lives.
Many nonprofit organizations have top leadership and management
teams with extensive experience in the private sector in an attempt to bring
more financial and management expertise to the organization. Leaders
voiced the challenges of clashes between business and nonprofit cultures.
Cited as new trends for the nonprofit sector are the employment of research
analysts for more evidence-based planning, a focus on revenues, and tighter
structures for increased cost and service efficiency. These new processes
sometimes are difficult to align with the client-centered service culture of
nonprofits. Although several leaders employed team-building and com-
munications training to assist with these differences in employee experi-
ence, many lacked the funds to invest in extensive training so dealt with
situations as they arose. All noted differences between business culture and
nonprofit culture in situations that elevate conflict in their organizations.
Another observed dichotomy of cultures is the culture of avoidance and
the culture of engagement. The majority of the organizations employ a
culture of avoidance among leadership and employees to varying degrees.
A number of leaders admitted they ignored certain interpersonal conflicts
in their organizations with the expectation that the conflicts “will work
themselves out” or “just go away.” One leader explained that the organiza-
tion avoids confronting conflict as a matter of policy. The employee survey
supported the existence of this culture of avoidance: 51 percent reported
that people in their organization avoid others with whom they are upset,
56 percent avoided dealing with a conflict issue directly and instead com-
plained to others about it, 43 percent said people do not go directly to the
person with whom they are having a problem, and 43 percent got someone
else to take care of the issue for them. One could argue that this type of
behavior is inherent in workplace situations, although a few organizations
stood out from the others in engaging their management teams and
employees to resolve conflict.
As we know through espoused theory and theory in use (Argyris and
Schön 1974), there is often a disconnect between a leader’s view of the orga-
nization and employees’ views. The team observed a connection between
flexible leaders and favorable employee attitudes toward conflict manage-
ment. Leaders who promoted collaboration and a shared responsibility for
handling conflict through mediation, negotiation, or facilitation rather than
the traditional grievance process had lower conflict in their organizations.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 405

Innovative Practices
A number of innovative and effective conflict management practices
emerged during the study. Overall, organizations employing these prac-
tices exhibited a high level of cultural competency, a learning approach to
managing conflict, and a flexible conflict management system.
Cultural competency is a core value, distinct from diversity training,
and is inclusive of an awareness of many different group orientations: race,
gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, job category, and others. Competency
identification begins with an intense selection and orientation process, a
reflection of community within the organization, and creating a culture of
respect and inclusion through training and flexible management. For
example, one organization’s leadership planning strategy was uniform
across the organization, with a mandatory criterion for leaders to “manage
others” in order to move up a grade level. After identifying an area of con-
flict in one group of engineers, executive management realized this process
did not work since engineers seek autonomy in their work and generally
have no desire to manage other workers. A different leadership plan was
developed for this group based on individual contributions with no direct
reports for anyone in the group. As a result, conflict was greatly reduced
within the employee group, and the organization activated a program to
review each department and work group separately for leadership and
training programs. This organization also operates global offices within
many countries and cultures, with employees working together on various
projects. The company invests in developing its own training and aware-
ness programs for teaching cultural competency across borders.
Learning-centered conflict management practices identified in the
interviews include training in communication skills (specific to interper-
sonal relationship skills), conflict resolution training, reflective and active
listening, and cross-functional job awareness. One organization monitors
the internal and external environment through conversations, politics, and
state laws and develops customized training programs based on any potential
conflict issues. One example involves a state law recently enacted in Florida
allowing employees to carry firearms to work if they have a concealed-
weapons permit. The organization developed a training program focusing
on violence in the workplace, awareness of this new law, and preventative
practices. The program is mandatory for all employees and includes follow-
up touch points. Rather than waiting for a conflict to surface in the orga-
nization, the organizational team anticipates potential issues and develops
employee conflict management training programs.
Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq
406 KATZ, FLYNN

The study investigated the ideal picture of conflict management within

organizations: the research teams asked what leaders would like to see in their
workplaces if there were no budgetary restraints. Due to the economy and
restricted budgets, many organizations have been forced to cut training pro-
grams for management and employees. After our conversations, many lead-
ers were better informed about conflict management and training tools and
expressed interest in learning more about practice models for conflict man-
agement. They also expressed a desire for professional skills and ethics train-
ing, innovative team-building workshops, conflict identification training,
client conflict training, communications, and meeting facilitation training.
One of the public organizations in the study that must negotiate pay
and benefits with its employees had been in negotiations for over a year
with no resolution in sight. It was revealed the organization does not use
professional facilitators or coaches, allows each side to choose a nonneutral
person to lead the negotiations, and allows employees to attend the nego-
tiations with loud noisemakers they can use to protest the direction of the
negotiations. The process is highly contentious and emotional; in fact,
the leader’s home was defaced with spray paint. Although this organization
realizes the benefit of conflict management services and training, the tradi-
tional adversarial process of contentious labor-management negotiations is
so ingrained in its history there is much skepticism about change.

Conclusion

The findings of this pilot study do not support the optimistic claims of
scholars and practitioners that workplace conflict management systems
and approaches are widely used, at least in Broward County. There is
instead an overwhelming reliance on traditional practices of dealing or not
dealing with conflict through executive denial, managerial avoidance, for-
mal grievances, and litigation or threats of it. If differences are to be facili-
tated, negotiated, or mediated, organizations often call in outside experts
instead of developing their own capacity. And there is a widespread lack of
knowledge of the availability of experts in conflict management, despite
the fact that the country’s largest graduate program in conflict analysis and
resolution resides at Nova Southeastern University in Fort Lauderdale, the
largest city in Broward County.
The reasons behind this situation and the issues raised may extend to all
corners of the organizational nation and the field of conflict resolution.
Multiple interpretations and definitions of conflict seem to have a negative
Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq
 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 407

effect on process and resolution. Many organizations do not realize the

benefits of conflict management training and tools or lack the resources or
knowledge to incorporate them into the processes of their organizations.
Most important, most organizations do not realize the high cost of unman-
aged conflict and many avoid dealing with conflict rather than facilitating
a more inclusive problem solving process.
Mayer (2004) believes that the field of conflict resolution is in crisis
and needs to be redefined to be relevant and effective. Conflict manage-
ment has the potential to be a viable, credible set of theories, principles,
and practices applied to business, the economy, the environment, and
social relations. Business and global relations are swiftly evolving. The
Internet is fueling globalization on a daily basis, and the triple bottom line
(people, planet, profit) is becoming increasingly important to society and
organizational survival. Conflict management has the potential to play a
key role in the success of organizations, although perhaps not in its tradi-
tional form. Nevertheless, although conflict management principles, skills,
and procedures are seen as valuable for many situations, they struggle to be
recognized as a viable solution for the myriad conflict issues faced by today’s
organizations.
Although additional research is warranted, the findings support the
idea that the success of any conflict management model in today’s society
must be flexible, adaptable to a breadth of situations and cultures and lead-
ership styles, be practical and cost-effective, and be easily communicated to
all employees in an organization.
Our job as scholars and practitioners is to reframe the conversation
about conflict and its related costs and to communicate clearly the range of
methods and the benefits of effective conflict management practices and
systems through a different lens. In essence, we must build a powerful busi-
ness case for how the conflict field and practice contributes to organiza-
tional effectiveness and efficiency. Highlighting how a more facilitative and
meditative approach in the workplace saves dollars, reduces turnover rates,
boosts morale, and increases productivity is required to gain the attention of
the business community. This develops a mind-set of viewing differences
and conflicts as inevitable by “encouraging the surfacing of issues, ideas and
concerns” (Katz and Cohen 2009, 87), and seeing the advantages of work-
place differences managed successfully as a “source of innovation, enlarged
perspective and vitality for the organization” (87). Powerful leadership mod-
els and benefit-centered conflict management case studies address the real
needs and concerns of contemporary businesses and organizations and are

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

408 KATZ, FLYNN

necessary to build that bridge of credibility and collaboration between con-

flict management and the business discipline.

References
Alghamdi, F. 2011. “Identifying Preferred Conflict Management Styles of Orga-
nizational Members by Gender and Work Experience.” PhD dissertation,
Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL.
Argyris, C., and D. Schön. 1974. Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effec-
tiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Arops, V. N., and G. Beye. 1997. Management of Agricultural Research: A Training
Manual, Module 4: Leadership, Motivation, Building and Conflict Manage-
ment. Rome, Italy: UN Food and Agricultural Organization.
Bates, K. A., S. D. Amundson, R. G. Schroeder, and W. T. Morris. 1995. “The
Crucial Interrelationship between Manufacturing Strategy and Organiza-
tional Culture.” Management Science 41:1565–80.
Bloom, S. L. 2006. Organizational Stress as a Barrier to Trauma-Sensitive Change
and System Transformation. Philadelphia: National Technical Assistance Cen-
ter for State Mental Health Planning.
Cloke, K., and J. Goldsmith. 2005. Resolving Conflict at Work. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Constantino, C. A., and C. S. Merchant. 1996. Designing Conflict Management
Systems: A Guide to Creating Productive and Healthy Organizations. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dana, D. 2001. Conflict Resolution: Mediation Tools for Everyday Worklife. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Fisher, R., W. L. Ury, and B. Patton. 1981. Getting to Yes: Negotiation Agreement
without Giving In. New York: Penguin.
Ford, J. 2001. “Cross Cultural Conflict Resolution in Teams.” http://www.mediate
.com/articles/ford5.cfm.
Gladwell, M. 2002. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Differ-
ence. Boston: Back Bay Books.
Gordon, J. 2003. The Pfeiffer Book of Successful Conflict Management Tools. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hovtepo, O. M., A. Assokere, I. Abdul-Azeez, and S. A. Ajemunighbohun. 2010.
“Empirical Study of Effects of Conflict on Organizational Performance in
Nigeria.” Business and Economics Journal, BEJ-15:1–9.
Jehn, K. A. 1995. “A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments
of Intergroup Conflict.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40:256–82.
Katz, D. A., and J. Cohen. 2009. “What Corporations Need to Know about How
to Install an Integrated Conflict Management System.” Alternatives to the
High Cost of Litigation 27 (6): 99–102.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

 Conflict Management Systems and Strategies 409

Lam, K. Y. 2005. “Workplace Conflict Management Styles: A Comparison of

Public Sector and Private Sector Employees in Hong Kong.” PhD dissertation,
City University of Hong Kong.
Lipsky, D. B., and R. L. Seeber. 2006. “Managing Organizational Conflict.” In
The Sage Handbook of Conflict Communication: Integrating Theory, Research
and Practice, edited by J. G. Oetzel and S. Ting-Toomey. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Lipsky, D. B., R. L. Seeber, and R. D. Fincher. 2003. Emerging Systems for Manag-
ing Workplace Conflict: Lessons from American Corporations for Managers and
Dispute Resolution Professionals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mayer, B. S. 2004. Beyond Neutrality: Confronting the Crisis in Conflict Resolution.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moore, C. 2003. The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict.
San Francisco: John Wiley.
O’Leary, R., and D. Van Slyke. 2010. “Introduction to the Symposium on the
Future of Public Administration in 2020.” Public Administration Review (Sup-
plement) 70:S5–S11.
Ozkalp, E., Z. Sungur, and A. A. Ozdemir. 2009. “Conflict Management Styles
of Turkish Managers.” Journal of European Industrial Training 33:419–38.
Rahim, M. A. 2001. Managing Conflict in Organizations. Westport, CT: Quorum.
Rahim, M. A. 2002. “Toward a Theory of Managing.” International Journal of
Conflict Management 13:206–35.
Ritzer, G. 2008. Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Roloff, M. E. 1987. “Communication and Conflict.” In Handbook of Communi-
cation, edited by C. R. Berge and S. H. Chaffee. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Schein, E. H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Taylor, D. 1992. “Organizational Effectiveness and the Expert.” Industrial Man-
agement and Data Systems 92:3–6.
Thomas, K., and W. Schmidt. 1976. “A Survey of Management Interests with
Respect to Conflict.” Academy of Management Journal 19:315–18.
Ury, W. 1993. Getting Past No: Negotiating in Difficult Situations. New York:
Bantam Dell.
Ury, W. 2000. The Third Side: Why We Fight and How We Can Stop. New York:
Penguin.
Wang. G., R. Jing, and A. Klossek. 2007. “Antecedents and Management of Con-
flict.” International Journal of Conflict Management 18:74–88.
Watson, C., and R. Hoffman. 1996. “Managers as Negotiators.” Leadership Quar-
terly 7:63–86.
Wilmot, W., and J. Hocker. 2007. Interpersonal Conflict. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq

410 KATZ, FLYNN

Neil H. Katz is professor and recent chair of the Department of Conflict

Analysis and Resolution at Nova Southeastern University in Ft. Lauderdale.

Linda T. Flynn is a doctoral candidate in organizational conflict studies at

Nova Southeastern University.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly • DOI: 10.1002/crq