Conflict Issues Across Disciplines: Conflict, Negotiation, and Mediation: African Experiences

By Thabani Ka Sigogo Sibanda

There are several definitions of conflict. Before elaborating on the
definition that will guide reading, the author provides some of the
definitions of conflict. Conflict is defined as derived from social beliefs and
involves two or more parties who share incompatible objectives

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris UK
• Release date: Jan 19, 2011
• ISBN: 9781456817619

Book preview

Copyright © 2013 by Thabani ka Sigogo Sibanda.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Rev. date: 11/13/2013

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Xlibris LLC

0-800-056-3182

www.xlibrispublishing.co.uk

[e-mail]

300914

Contents

Acknowledgements

Chapter 1 Introduction: Basis Of Conflict

Definition Of Conflict

Approaches To Human Needs

Existence, Relatedness, And Growth (Erg) Theory

Motivation–Hygiene Theory

Mcclelland’s Theory Of Needs

Goal-Setting Theory

Equity Theory

The Expectancy Theory

Needs Theorists And Conflict

Psychobiological Basis Of Aggression

Frustration–Aggression Theory

Social Learning Theory

Cognitive Approaches

Misperception, Miscalculation, And Conflict

General Criticism

Conclusion

Chapter 2 Introduction: Multiple Forms Of Conflict: Experiences From Institutions

Intergroup Conflict In Institutions

Culturally Based Conflict In Institutions

Personality Clashes Within Institutions

Intrapersonal Conflict As A Source Of Institutional Conflict

Institutional Conflict And Scarce Resources

Power And Status Within Institutions

Structure As Basis Of Conflict In Institutions

People As Team Players In Institutions

Conclusion

Chapter 3 The Dynamics And Escalation Process In Conflict (Experiences From Africa)

The Dynamics And Escalation Process In A Conflict

Dynamics Of Conflict Process

Theoretical Issues In Conflict Processes

Evolution Of Conflict

Multiple Levels Of Conflict

Multifactorial Processes Of Conflict

Power Distribution In Conflict Process

Dynamics Of Conflict And Phase Models

The Seven-Stage Model And Conflict In Uganda

Constructive And Destructive Conflict: A Case Of Uganda

Escalation Process

Aggressor–Defender Model

Conflict Spiral Model

The Structural Change Model

Typical Experiences In Conflict Escalation

Conclusion

Chapter 4 Introduction: Centrality Of Realism In Conflict

Historical Basis Of Realism

Statehood And Need For Power

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy In Nation Formation

Military Capability And Supremacy

Protecting International Distribution Of Power

Realists And Foreign Policy Making

Main Proponents Of Realism

Conclusion

Chapter 5 Introduction: Human Security And Development As Factors In Conflict

Human Security: The Human Rights Agenda

Human Security And Development

Preceding Concepts Of Security

United Nations Development Programme

And The Concept Of Human Security

The Interrelationship Between Human Security And Development

Peace As Basis For Development

Peacekeeping, Security, And Development

Peace Building, Security, And Development

Conclusion

Chapter 6 Introduction: Governance And Conflict In African States

Governance Defined

Political Institutions, Governance, And Conflict In Africa

Personalization Of Political Power

Human Rights Abuses And Conflict

Political Reform And Conflict In Africa

Governance, Ethnicity, And Social Integration

Governance As Conflict Management

Conclusion

Chapter 7 Introduction: Mediation In Southern African Conflicts

Neutrality Among The Mediators

Perceived Lack Of Neutrality Among Churches

Perceived Lack Of Neutrality Among States

International Mediation In Southern Africa

Exploring African Originated Methods Of Mediation In Southern Africa

Conclusion

Chapter 8 Introduction: Negotiating Conflicts

Distributive Versus Integrative Bargaining

Negotiation In Managing Change

Negotiation In Bilateral Agreements

Negotiations In Multilateral Situations

Negotiations In International Disputes

Negotiations In Public Disputes

Negotiations In Labour Disputes

Negotiations In Cultural Context

Conclusion

References

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my gratitude for the support and encouragement I received from my wife, Sukoluhle. Gratitude goes to my children—Dalisizwe, Londisizwe, and Lindelwe—who have had to adjust to my busy schedule. Many thanks go to my readers, who gave comments on the first edition of this book.

CHAPTER 1

Introduction: Basis of Conflict

DEFINITION OF CONFLICT

T here are several definitions of conflict. Before elaborating on the definition that will guide reading, the author provides some of the definitions of conflict. Conflict is defined as derived from social beliefs and involves two or more parties who share incompatible objectives (Kriesberg 1998).

Coser (1956) demonstrates how conflict can create cohesion in a group and preserve its existence and how it binds adversaries together in a relationship. He argues that conflict can establish and maintain a balance of power between antagonists, thereby creating alliances and associations. However, he sees conflict as a primarily functional and not as a negative force in the development of society.

Pruitt and Rubin (1986) define conflict as a perceived ‘divergence of interests’ or the view that opposing parties involved in a situation cannot achieve their aspirations concurrently. Burton (1990) refers to values and needs as central to conflict. In Burton’s study, conflict is defined as intentional struggles among parties who make use of power to defeat or remove those people or groups who may be their adversaries in order to obtain ‘status, power, resources and other scarce values’ (Himes 1980: 14).

This definition, like that of Coser (1956), addresses some of the issues related to conflict, such as access to power and resources, which cut across a number of definitions. This idea is central to the theories of conflict.

APPROACHES TO HUMAN NEEDS

Several theories focusing on needs as a source of conflict based their understanding of needs on Murray’s and Maslow’s theories of hierarchy of needs. Maslow’s theory postulates that people have a variety of basic needs ranging from physiological, safety and security, to social, esteem, and self-actualization needs.

Physiological needs refer to states such as hunger, thirst, shelter, and sex. Safety covers protection from physical and emotional harm. Social needs refer to affection, belongingness, acceptance, and friendship. Esteem includes self-respect, autonomy, achievement, status, and recognition. Self-actualization refers to achieving one’s potential, aspirations, and self-fulfilment. Maslow assumes that these needs have to be satisfied on the basis of hierarchy. For example, physiological needs have to be satisfied before safety needs.

Several theorists have added some dimensions to Maslow’s theory of needs or have developed other related ideas subsequent to the theories of need. These include the following: Clayton Alderfer, Frederick Herzberg, Victor Vroom, Edwin Locke, and David McClelland. The most central theorist in the field of conflict is John Burton, who explicitly extended his work beyond the concept of motivation. A brief overview of these theories is given below.

Existence, relatedness, and growth (ERG) theory

Clayton Alderfer reworked Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to align it more closely with the empirical research (1969). Alderfer says that there are three categories of needs—namely, existence, relatedness, and growth—hence, labelled as the ERG theory. This theory does not assume a rigid set of needs and contends that if a higher need is not fulfilled, a lower need may as well be taken care of. He notes that multiple needs can operate simultaneously.

This theory recognizes the fact that factors such as family responsibility, social engagement, and cultural environment can affect the driving force that a group of needs holds for a particular individual. In some cultures, such as native Spain and Japan, social needs are placed before physiological needs (Haire, Ghiselli, and Porter 1963). In the context of the above-mentioned view, some people may work towards creating relationships and be conciliatory rather than conflictual. Robbins et al. (1994) argue that ERG’s need hierarchy is a more scientifically valid version of other needs theories.

Motivation–hygiene theory

Frederick Herzberg proposed the theory of motivation. He moved away from Maslow’s hierarchy of needs approach to motivation. He examined the issues and the experiences that made people feel satisfied or dissatisfied in what they were engaged with. This theory became a need–motivation theory and is popularly known as the two-factor theory (Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman 1959).

Herzberg’s initial study involved 200 engineers and accountants from Western Pennsylvania in the 1950s. He and his colleagues believed that people had two basic needs. The needs were related to (1) animalistic aversion of pain and (2) desire for psychological development and growth. Work conditions would somehow affect these needs. According to Herzberg, satisfaction is created by inclusion of motivation factors into a person’s aspirations. Things such as responsibility, achievement, recognition, and advancement are viewed as central to satisfaction (Nelson and Quick 1994).

According to Nelson and Quick (1994), dissatisfaction occurs when the hygiene factors are absent or inadequate. The authors further note that, for example, in Herzberg’s theory, organizational policy, administration, technical supervision, salary, quality of relationships with supervisors, work conditions, and status constituted the hygiene factors. According to Robbins et al. (1994), elimination of these factors does not necessarily mean any satisfaction either. Rather, they have interpersonal and psychosocial implications and a sense of orderliness in social interaction.

Herzberg’s two-factor theory has its weaknesses. His results cannot be generalized due to the fact that the sample was drawn from one professional group of the participants. Interpretations of the results are likely to be inconsistent, hence skewed. His theory is not necessarily one for motivation as satisfaction–dissatisfaction does not necessarily mean that people are motivated. There were no clear-cut criteria for measuring satisfaction in Herzberg’s research (Robbins et al. 1994).

McClelland’s theory of needs

McClelland’s theory (1939) is regarded as a contemporary theory of motivation. McClelland was guided by Murray’s needs theory. These needs were identified as follows: power, affiliation, and achievement. The need for power pushes people to look for positions that they can use to command influence and control. The need for affiliation drives individuals to seek interpersonal relationships or networks and be in a position to participate in social activities. The need for achievement is the push factor to thrive for achieving goals or tasks (Nelson and Quick 1994).

High achievers distinguish themselves from other people by their urgency to do things better. McClelland noted differences across nations in achievement motivation. In their planning, higher achievers think about succeeding. The need for power is concerned with recognition, influence, and making an impact on the social environment. It is about controlling and changing the world. There is implicit need for personalized as opposed to socialized power. While McClelland suggests that the need for affiliation is crucial, people carry their habits into new relationships in the endeavour to obtain power.

Goal-setting theory

Goal setting is viewed as a technique for motivation that goes along with expectancy, effort, and performance concepts of motivation. When conducted by an organization, it is management by objectives (Bass and Barrett 1981).

The goal-setting theory is associated with Edwin Locke. This approach assumes that goal setting is central in any human activity, particularly when motivating people for work. People are motivated when they have goals and when they are committed to achieving them. One can set the stage for achieving goals by offering financial incentives, involving employees in goal setting, creating competition, providing feedback about performance, setting time limits, praising an employee, and giving instructions. Several studies have supported Locke’s views of goal setting in motivating employees (Bass and Barrett 1981). Achievement orientation is a concept that is close to setting goals. There is room for companies to set specific goals and making those goals challenging enough for the person to reduce conflict-related behaviour. There is a potential for conflict if goals are not clear or individuals do not meet their set goals.

However, the difficulty with the goal setting theory is that it does not demonstrate how goals motivate people. There is little detail about what processes are involved in goal setting to the extent that it is more of a technique to motivate people than a theory (Robbins et al. 1994).

Equity theory

Adams’ equity theory is among several of the equity theories. The equity theory postulates that individuals make comparison of their effort with what they are rewarded for. Individuals are motivated to reduce any form of perceived inequity. For an example, consider that the worker has spent twelve hours working on a project. Her counterparts have been involved in a similar project in half the time. But for the time spent, these employees are paid the same amount of money or reward. The employee who spent twelve hours on the project will experience tension that is proportional to the amount of reward that she received.

Tension is a form of internalized conflict that has a potential to externalize itself. One could think of industrial action as a situation in which this theory can be applied. People get motivated to change situations that they are not comfortable with, but in the process of doing so, they find themselves in conflicted relationships.

Inequity can be reduced by changing inputs, outcomes, conditions, leaving the employment situation, or by substitution (Robbins et al. 1994). In an organization framework, most studies have investigated performance as an input and pay as an outcome. The equity theory argues that inequity will be perceived both when people are underpaid and overpaid. The motivational part of the theory is derived from the consequences of perceived inequity (Roberts and Hunt 1991).

This theory explains the motivational aspect of some people in a narrow sense. There is implicit understanding that payment must be in the form of monetary gain rather than, perhaps, other social incentives or meeting certain interests. However, it is noteworthy that some studies have looked beyond monetary rewards to things such as job title or office space and issues such as defining inputs and outcomes of given negotiations or situations.

The expectancy theory

The expectancy theory is associated with Victor Vroom. The theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act in a particular way is influenced by the strength of expectation that follows the act. It looks at how attractive the settlement or reward is, the linkage between performance and reward, and the linkage between effort and performance. The individual weighs the worth of the performance over goals that must be achieved.

The task may have perceived outcomes in the form of salary, job security, interpersonal relationships, trust, and opportunity to use skills or acquire new things. The outcomes may be viewed positively. The individual effort is seen as directly linked to individual performance, which attracts organizational rewards, and individual goals can then be achieved (Robbins et al. 1994). However, conflict may arise if the act that has become intense is guided by an expectation that is misplaced. Where there is deceit of the expectation, there is likelihood of tension and misunderstanding.

The theory has three important concepts that go with it. Instrumentality refers to the strength of the belief that performance (first-level outcome) will result in reward (second-level outcome). Expectancy refers to the belief in a particular action resulting in an outcome (Robbins et al. 1994).

However, the theory tends to oversimplify issues of behavioural engagement, especially when applied across situations. There seems to be no direct measure of the person’s valence, instrumentality, and expectancy. It would be difficult to apply the theory across situations. This theory does not take cognizance of many other social factors and values that an individual may be interested in, which may not be directly linked to effort and performance.

Nevertheless, while these theories try to look at a variety of aspects of human nature, they all relate to human needs. There has been broad speculation in terms of what motivates people to want to change their situations or stake, make demands on other people, or fight for what they believe to be theirs. Such behavioural engagements could be influenced by several but related factors. Burton (1990) takes further the view of needs as a central factor in human interaction.

Needs theorists and conflict

The most important theorist in conflict is John Burton. In his understanding of needs, there is a sense of them being universal. The human needs theory covers the individual and ‘the Identity group of the individual as the unit of analysis’ for survival’ (Burton 1990: 1). Christie (1997) argues that Burton’s human needs theory provides an alternative perspective to the dominant theory of power politics whose principle is to work around the power of the adversaries. The needs theory views management of conflict and social justice being attainable through pursuance of satisfaction of needs.

Burton assumes that needs are predispositions that are programmed genetically. Instead of looking at needs as motivational factors in explaining behaviour, Burton argues that needs are constant across times with methods of achieving them being variant to suit the demands of the day. Individuals would follow any means that enable them to meet their needs. The methods may be socially unacceptable. The theory emphasizes non-use of coercion, deterrence, and force as measures for dealing with conflict (Burton 1990).

Needs theorists seem to agree that the most important needs to be addressed in major conflicts are the needs for security and identity (Fisher 1990; Wessells 1995). Several examples to