management is pivotal for the success of such an important phase of every family business. It is not a case that the main review of family business research described conflict in family business as an extremely important area for research (Sharma 2004). Yet, in a recent review of the investigations of succession in family business, Daspit and colleagues (2016) argued how conflicts’ influence on the transition of power remains to be clearly articulated. Thus, this paper aims at responding to the call for research to deepen our understanding of the dynamics of conflictmanagement and negotiation within family firms, focusing on the succession phase. Therefore, what is the style of conflictmanagement and negotiation of small family businesses in Tuscany? How does the style co-evolve across generations? The present paper intends to investigate the characteristics of managing conflict and negotiating across different generations in family businesses and it evolved across generations. Adopting a qualitative approach, the paper analyses the case studies of two highly successful, both in terms of financial performance and in terms of management of the succession, family businesses in Tuscany. The case studies are built through semi-structured interviews. Data was analysed adopting two frameworks from the conflictmanagement and negotiation literature: the dual concern model (Walton & McKersie 1965; Lewicki et al. 2014; Rubin et al. 1994) and the 2-class model (Ogliastri & Quintanilla 2016).
2 VALUE NEGOTIATION AND CONFLICTMANAGEMENT Introduction
Negotiation, influencing and conflictmanagement are critical skills in all dimensions of life and society. In particular, public administrators and leaders are constantly required to influence multiple stakeholders in order to get things done and to manage change and conflict. This programme allows participants to increase effectiveness managing people and projects, and driving policy agendas. The programme explores systematic ways to negotiate, influence and manage conflict. It aims to help increase awareness of the negotiation process as well as of our own assumptions and behaviours, and to improve negotiation skills and results by developing systematic approaches to prepare and conduct negotiations. This is an experiential programme, where participants engage in interactive lectures, exercises, role plays and discussions.
The functionality of different strategies has been researched to find out which strategy contributes to organisational effectiveness. The Problem Solving approach is often cited as the most beneficial, since it benefits all parties involved and reduces stress (Rahim & Buntzman, 1990; Fisher, et al., 1991; Friedman, Tidd, Currall & Tsai, 2000). Burke (1970) found that Problem Solving related to effective management, whereas Avoiding and Dominating related to ineffective management, which was supported by Likert and Likert’s (1976) research. Kuhn and Poole (2000) also found that groups that developed problem solving type conflictmanagement styles made more effective decisions than groups that used dominating or avoiding type styles. However, other results showed that Problem Solving strategies are linked positively to satisfaction, but not to organisational performance (Aram, Morgan, and Esbeck, 1971). Furthermore, a Problem Solving strategy alone is not necessarily the best strategy to cope with a conflict if it concerns de-escalation (Van de Vliert & Euwema, 1994), or if the conflict is about a relational or emotional issue (de Dreu, 1997). Avoiding is generally viewed as the second most favorable strategy, especially in intercultural conflicts (Leung, 1988). Furthermore, Bradford, Stringfellow, & Weitz (2001) concluded that “the use of conflictmanagement behaviours can either offset or exaggerate the negative impact of conflict on team outcomes”(p. 20), since they found that competitive strategies had a positive main effect on task performance, whereas compromising had a positive main effect on the creativity of the team solution and satisfaction of the team members. Tinsley and Pillutla (1998) found that North American subjects preferred Problem Solving but Chinese subjects preferred equality procedures, and concluded that the preferred conflictmanagement strategy for one country may not work for the other. Hence Problem Solving behaviour, like any other strategy, may generate Perceived Negotiation Satisfaction for one party but dissatisfaction for the other in cross-cultural negotiations. Furthermore, the findings by Burke and Likert and Likert may be due to the Western background of their samples.
A number of authors (Blake and Mouton 1964; Rahim 2002; Oetzel et al. 2001) argue that conflicts can be categorized as either interpersonal (affective) or task/goal (substantive). Interpersonal conflicts are clearly more intractable than task/goal conflicts and can lead to imbedded friction short and long term. Rahim (2002) contends that interpersonal conflict diminishes group loyalty, commitment, job satisfaction, and intention to stay in the organization. Both Rahim and Jehn (1995) suggest that while task/goal conflict may enhance performance under certain circumstances, the downsides are the same as for interpersonal conflicts. Krauss and Morsella (2000) contend that communication is critical in conflictmanagement and set forth four paradigms for effective communications: encoder-decoder, intentionalist, perspective-taking, and dialogic.
of conflicts in the company has not only a negative impact, but often we can accept the conflict as a positive phenomenon. It stimulates creative solving of problems, which results in positive changes in the company. It is important, however, that they know the employees recognize the conflict in time and resolve it in the shortest possible way. Through all time periods, people have been and will be constantly negotiating. From day to day, we are faced with negotiation skills when we negotiate with family members, about important decisions and interests, we negotiate with our superiors for a better position in the company and the level of salary, we also negotiate with competition and fight for your own benefit. The employees of both analyzed companies also use bargaining skills to a large extent. So we can say that negotiation is a constant process in every individual's life. Despite the development of technology, we do not yet know a device that could replace human negotiation skills, because we do not know the alternative to the human mind. However, our technology is very helpful in storing, editing and protecting various data and documents.
Under some circumstances, the best solution for managing project conflicts is the confronting/problem solving, or negotiation, mode. Since project management involves solving problems as the project progresses through its life cycle, this type of conflictmanagement is very practical. This approach aims for a win-win strategy, which is best for both the project and the parties involved. It is important to bear in mind, however, that negotiation and confrontation take time. They simply cannot be managed in a rapid manners but instead require a significant commitment from the project manager in terms of time and willingness to allow all parties to air their grievances. Conflicts are managed effectively if they are resolved on a permanent basis.
According to some studies, regarding the conflict causes and why it develops, the conflict arises due to various reasons. Also, the results of the questionnaire show that the conflict is not merely caused by just one reason, rather than a variety of reasons that affect the appearance and development of the conflict. During its development, the conflict may escalate, and this often occurs due to the involved parties’ influence on the emotional state. Prior to this, it is up to the manager to react and try to take advantage of the conflict. Conflicts occur when individuals and groups consider their objective to be too important and exclusive to others. (Kume,2010, p.285) Therefore, when conflict occurs, we need to use conflict approaches, in order to approach and manage the conflict. Regarding the forms of access, conflict access approach has positive forms of access, mainly of low self-interest and high interest to others, or of high interest to both parties. After the access, we reach the main part of the conflict, where we confront with conflict and need to manage it. The management process is not a simple process, rather than a process that needs to undergo some steps. Firstly, the problem should be diagnosed, then the intervention (in structure or process) should be done. In the case of intervention, the confrontation with the conflict occurs, and after the intervention, we understand the positive or negative effect that conflict gives in that case. In addition to this process, organizational justice, the role of emotions, the taking of perspective, brainstorming or “brain shake,” the profile of conflict dynamics, the compilation of the logical argument, the Vaaland improvement model, and negotiation are of great importance in conflictmanagement.
Recent insights look at integrated learning platforms (Fisher & Fisher-Yoshida, 2017). Petranek, Corey and Black (1992) subdivide the simulation into ‘preparation,’ ‘interaction’ and ‘debriefing’ phases. The preparation stage of the Bradford simulation in weeks 1-3 focuses on the use of interrogatives in interactions and the self-realisation by students that the power of the ‘question’ is infinite in conflictmanagement. Micro activities raising awareness of communication and negotiation strategies are used, with lexical and conceptual awareness tasks being introduced. Lockstep teaching strategies are replaced by student-centred tasks to sensitise and empower them to take responsibility for their own learning. Tasks are introduced reflecting Levels 1 – 3 (Recognising, Understanding and Applying) of Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy (2001). This is the start of the ‘marketing’ of the simulation that prepares them for the full simulation commencing in week 4. During weeks 1-3, the Law and Social Science students are taught separately, it is only until the simulation is introduced when they engage with students from the other faculty.
During the course, feedback is provided to students through various assessments. The first half of the course (i.e. introduction of “tools” and environmental dynamics) requires the following: weekly readings from Harvard Business Review articles and other credible, practitioner-based sources; weekly online, open-article and open-note quizzes to ensure completion of reading and understanding of concepts; and an essay-format midterm exam. The second half of the course uses different assessment tools necessitated by the nature of negotiation needing much practice for skillset cultivation: negotiation role play case preparations are due for large, in-class negotiation activities; a negotiation journal is written by students focusing on tools/concepts attempted, mistakes made, insights gained, emotions encountered, and future goals set, all in reaction to each negotiation activity; and a final exam tests material mastered throughout the entire course. Note that students are never graded on whether they “win” or “lose” a negotiation. Instead, the classroom environment is designed to be a safe learning space in which students are encouraged to try new concepts and experience their effects. Because negotiation, in particular—and the management of conflict situations, in general—require practice for skill development, students are evaluated on their learning process and other outcome variables rather than on such a dichotomous result.
knowledge relevant to Chinese negotiation practices will help generate insights into Chinese business mindset (Ghauri and Fang 2001) and increase the success rate of Sino-Western business cooperation.
During a business negotiation, the negotiators, either consciously or subconsciously, are subject to various disagreements and clashes of interests. Their responses not only determine the outcomes of a conflict, but also notably affect their bargaining performance (Thomas 1992a). According to Kirkbride, Tang, and Westwood (1991), negotiation behaviors, to a certain extent, can be predicated on culturally influenced conflictmanagement styles (i.e. competing, collaborating, compromising, accommodating, and avoiding). Consequently, in the last few decades, cultural antecedents leading to Chinese conflict handling styles have been widely discussed in literature (Ghauri and Fang 2001; Kim et al. 2007; Leung et al. 2011; Ma et al. 2015). In particular, face (Mianzi) arises as one of the key concerns (Aslani et al. 2016; Johnson et al. 2004; Merkin 2018; Peng and Tjosvold 2011; Ting-Toomey 2005). It is acknowledged that the traditional Western portrayal of negotiations as strategic interactions practiced by rational agents pursuing self-interest and economic gains (Curhan et al. 2006) may not be readily carried over to the oriental face cultures (Aslani et al. 2016). When confronted with negotiation conflicts, typical Chinese are more likely to think of face threats, and such unpleasant personal perceptions will cast significant influences on their conflict handling behaviors (Merkin 2018; Ting-Toomey 2005) in a form of social and psychological cost (Curhan et al. 2006). In order to reveal the mechanism of face, previous research has focused on the locus of face to investigate the relationships between perceived self/other-face threats and various conflictmanagement behaviors
Negotiation and conflictmanagement are crucial skills both inside and outside of work. They are vital for everything from
negotiating agreements, negotiating commitment to carrying out agreements and changing agreements that are no longer optimal. In addition, leaders, managers, and supervisors spend significant amounts of their day resolving conflicts, mediating disputes and negotiating with others. Our Certificate in Negotiation and Conflict Resolution will help you to more effectively deal with complex situations while improving relationships and working toward optimal rather than sub-optimal solutions.
Employers can promote quality practice settings in which nurses are encouraged to understand conflict and employ strategies to mitigate it. Employers can institute reporting systems to help nurses acknowledge when conflict has occurred. A fair and efficient reporting system encourages communication among staff members by helping nurses identify underlying causes of conflict. Open communication and understanding will promote an atmosphere of trust and respect within the health care team.
Privacy. The trust negotiation algorithm sketched above favors simplicity and efficiency over privacy (sometimes called safety). In response to a request for a certificate, a trust manager running this algorithm requests certificates to try to satisfy the release policy for a certtable only if the certtable actually contains a certificate that satisfies the original request. Thus, the existence of those secondary requests reveals the existence of such a certificate, compromising privacy, even if that certificate does not get released. More sophisticated trust negotiation algorithms that ensure privacy can be used instead, e.g., algorithms based on the trust target graph (TTG) . The basic idea is that a trust manager tries to satisfy the release policies for the certtables relevant to a request regardless of whether the certtables actually contain certificates that satisfy the request.
n Intact Team Training—this one-day classroom training is designed to help
teams develop the skills necessary to use conflict to the team’s advantage rather than allowing it to become a barrier to the mission. through the analysis of team process and team dynamics, teams will be prepared to build better relationships, and to move from awareness, to understanding, and then to effectiveness. n Executive Sessions: these are 2 to 4 hour briefings for naSa senior leadership
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Robert C. Bordone, Tobias C. Berkman, and Sara E. del Nido, The Negotiation Within: The Impact of Internal Conflict Over Identity and Role on Across-The-Table Negotiations, 2014 J. Disp. Resol. (2014) Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2014/iss2/2
appeared to be present, they were not stable enough to endure the pressures exercised on them (see Table 1). Even though the initial elections to the Northern Ireland assembly seemed to be a clear vote in favour of the new constitutional status, the reality of the situation in the province betrayed this superficial impression. The cooperating élites had a rather secure two-thirds majority in the assembly, but their influence and control over their (former) electorate on the outside was far less permanent and stable, in particular as far as Unionists in favour of the new arrangements and the APNI were concerned. 3 Apart from this lack of popular support for the settlement, there was also an essential lack of institutional support and failure of politicians to implement counter-measures. While British government policy was not to negotiate with the UWC, there were no decisive steps taken to prevent the breakdown of public life in Northern Ireland, nor was enough done to counter the pressure from UWC activists on members of the Unionist community who were opposed to the strike or undecided about their role in it. Sunningdale was not a treaty between two states, but an agreement reached between two states and a selected number of political parties. In order to work, it would have required substantial support for those partners in the agreement who were most vulnerable to pressures from within their own communities. The pro-agreement parties in both blocs were vulnerable to outflanking by hard-core radicals. That this support for pro-agreement politicians was not forthcoming was one of the major reasons for the failure of this early attempt to resolve the Northern Ireland conflict.
process. I put the following question to all the people I talked to in this context: Let's suppose our joint work at the problems were successful: By what parameters would you know at a predetermined date (which is half a year later) that the culture of cooperation has improved? The replies to that question were highly specific. Let me give some examples: 1) behaviour of X in group meetings: X listens, lends an ear to the wishes of the employees, reflects on them, does not block them off right away. 2) Clear strategy regarding the new technology Y: there is internal communication about it, we stick to it for 2 years. 3) People seek contact with each other…., greet each other, and there are smiles between the „old “and the „new“ employees. In a next step, I used those comments for my further work: „On a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the positive situation that you have just described, where are you now?" The ensuing discussion about the current position and the next small steps at bringing about a change as well as the possible contribution of each individual party to the conflict yielded many positive suggestions.
For the present study both exploratory and conclusive research methods were used. The conclusive research method here is descriptive in nature and the research design is single cross-sectional. In this study primary data has been collected through survey method. The research was conducted with the help of a structured interview schedule based on ConflictManagement Styles (Pareek, 1997). The original instrument has already been tested for reliability and validity and proposes the following conflictmanagement styles: