Research Paper on:
Organization Conflict and Negotiation

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
can be said to be a disagreement in perceptions. It is this disagreement in perceptions that can enable the negotiator to gain the upper hand in trying to mediate between  two hostile parties, or when trying to repair a damaged manager/team relationship. In fact, the largest differences concerning the definition of conflict is generally centered around intent and whether the  conflict is limited to certain overt acts(Robbins, 2000). Robbins definition of conflict, then encompasses at least four major areas of contention, those being, perception, opposition, scarcity and blockage. Traditionally,  there have been three major approaches to solving conflict among people. The earliest theories considered that all conflict was bad and to be avoided at all costs. This was pretty  much consistent with the prevailing theories of the early 1930s or so, which tended to state that if one could determine the cause of the malfunction, one could fix it  with a simple change in policy. This change generally was thought to be the fault of the general manager since he/she obviously wasnt really in touch with her/his workers. This  theory also stated that the real reason for the conflict was a lack of openness and communication between team members and upper management(Robbins, 2000). Then, there seemed to be a  major shift in ideas to the other side of the spectrum. The Human Relations theory stated that conflict between human beings was inevitable and that conflict could actually be a  good thing in the organization. Now, the prevailing theory is a curious mixture of the two previously stated theories. Yes, conflict is inevitable, however, simply placing a bandage over  the symptom does not get to the underlying causes, so as a result the modern theory goes just one step beyond to the interactionist conflict theory. This theory states that