A_Study_on_the_Conflict_Resolu.pdf

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 81

A Study on the Conflict Resolution Styles of Generation Y Students in Indian Context

Smarty Mukundan, Dhanya M, Dr. K P Saraswathyamma

FISAT Business School, Mookkannoor P.O, Angamaly, Ernakulam, Kerala, India.

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

[email protected]

Abstract

Generation Y, is probably the fastest growing workforce and the most recent cohorts to enter the

workforce in the world today. Unlike the erstwhile generation of theirs, they are an affluent

generation and raised in a time of economic prosperity and expansion .This generation is typified

by certain characteristics as they are highly techsavy, family centric , achievement oriented and

prefer to have meaningful careers . It is quite likely that conflict happen when the two generations

co exists under the same roof. The paper attempts to find out the conflict styles adopted by the Gen

Y students. Conflict styles has been measured using the conflict resolution Inventory (CRI)

instrument prepared by S Purohit, which measures the five dimensions namely confrontation,

compromise , negotiation, withdrawal and resignation. An attempt has been made to find out

whether Gen Y with their typical characteristics has a specific conflict style. Preference of conflict

styles across the gender and background and work experience has been looked into. The CRI

instrument was administered with around 136 respondents pursuing under graduate and post

graduate course in the city of Cochin to find out the conflict styles of these students. The study

revealed that a dominant conflict style was not associated with this generation.

The findings, implications, directions for further research and the limitations are discussed in the

paper

Key words: Conflict Styles, Approach Mode, Avoidance Mode, Generation X, Generation Y.

Introduction

Recently a senior HR professional in an article quoted of his experience of an “employee

impasse “ at his office as the impasse had to with a young group of campus hires who had decided

to protest against their manager’s lack of respect for “their space.” A chief trainer in her late 50’s

was angry because her phone calls were never answered back, instead found the response back as

text or emails in her inbox. This is where the outlook of generation varies- we term them as Gen

X & Gen y and perhaps more to come. Fortune Y Magazine has termed Gen y as the high

maintenance but potentially most high performing generation in history as they are entering the

workplace with more information greater technological skills and high expectation for themselves

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 82

and others. Gen y is increasingly important now because of the fact that they are becoming part of

workforce and customer dynamics have changed drastically which beckon for creative ways of

handling these multi generations.

Generation defined

The term generation has been defined in numerous ways. One of the most accepted

definitions refers a generation as “a group of people or cohorts who share birth years and

experiences as they move through time together" (Kupperschmidt, 2000, p. 66). This definition,

as well as other definitions defines generation as a group of people with similar views, values, and

attitudes, as a result of common life experiences (Edmunds & Turner, 2005; Ryder, 1965). The

effects of these life experiences are seen as fairly stable over their lives (Smola & Sutton, 2002)

and can be used to distinguish one generation from another (Jurkiewicz & Brown, 1998).

The four generations

A review of the literature (Hammill, 2005; Dwyer,2008; Wynn,2011; Saxena & Jain,2012)

on the categorization of these generational cohorts shows that each cohort has been exposed to

certain specific economic factors, technological factors and socio-cultural factors that have shaped

up their values, beliefs and attitudes. It was found that they can be categorized as shown in the

Table 1. Very limited empirical research has been done as such in these generational differences

and hence the generalizations are subject to criticism too. Therefore the categorization of these

cohorts with their specific characteristics can be viewed in a superficial sense.

Type of

generation

Also known as Corresponding

Years

Events that shaped up their

values ,beliefs and attitudes

Veterans Seniors/traditionalists 1945 and earlier The great depression, two world

wars, threat of nuclear exchange

Baby

boomers

Boomer 1946-1966 Largest generation in numbers

,prolonged cold wars ,experienced

prosperity and affluence

Generation X Baby bust 1967-1980 Outsourcing ,rampant

downsizing, modernization

,energy crisis, new feminism

,personal computers

Generation Y The nexters

/millennial /echo

boomers

1980 -2000 Increased violence ,terrorist

attacks, celebrity scandals ,reality

shows, increase in nuclear family

Table 1: Categorization of Generational cohorts

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 83

The changing demographics bring in the possibility of at least four generations of people

working together under the same roof. Gen y ‘s in the workforce are going to increase markedly

in the workspace. It is predicted that by 2020 the matures/ veterans in the workplaces will gradually

decrease to 1% and Boomers 15 percent. The Gen Xers will show the least change over the next

decade, remaining at approximately 25-30 percent of the workplace in 2020.Gen y will constitute

around 45 – 50 % of the workforce. A new generation of employees (Generation Z, born in the

late 1990s) is projected to begin entering the workplace by around 2020.This changing

demographic trends indicate that there would be four generations with distinct views, values &

attitudes and coexisting under the same roof . Creating a work environment that will reduce conflict

and misunderstanding and enhancing their productivity from both the newer (gen y) cohorts and

the older (gen x) cohorts would be greatest challenge for the HR managers and the supervisors

Gen y characteristics

This enormously powerful group in terms of sheer size brought up during the times of

economic prosperity believes in empowerment, are networked ,collaborative ,highly social and

team focused, (UN report 2010) need they demand workplace relationships that cater to the their

needs of social networking, work life balance and civic engagement. loyalty does not have the

same meaning as their earlier cohorts had as these millennial’s seek for instant gratification (Wynn

2012).These generational cohorts also known as the nexters can never be lured by distant pay

raises and promotions. They wouldn’t mind leaving their employer if they find a better opportunity

elsewhere for themselves. They expect to be included in intellectual talk and included in

management decision. They do not believe in hierarchies and rather expect a mentoring role from

the seniors than a supervisory role. To this generation, work is seen as an elective activity to

further one's personal goals rather than a necessity (Saxena & Jain 2012). Some researchers

connote them in negative manner as the "generation me" as they are sometimes described with

negative connotations such as being self-centered and unmotivated .However, this cohort has

emerged as the most educated, technology savvy generation ever. They have also been quoted as

ones who have strong work ethics when they have landed in the right job. Unlike their predecessor

gen y has seen the recession and how their parents lost their jobs and savings they value work life

balance and working for long hours never appeal to this generation.

Multi generations and role of conflict

The shift in the demographics in terms of multi generations at workplaces brings in a lot

of diversity too. This brings in a lot of complexities as each generation have their own expectations

of the workplace and hence perspectives differ which brings in scope for conflicts at workplace.

While several generations are at the workplace they should be encouraged to deal with generational

differences and adopt the right conflict styles too. Failure to do so may cause misunderstandings,

mis communications and mixed signals (Smola & Sutton, 2002). Conflicts are likely to arise

between the baby boomers /Gen x and the Gen y as they would comprise a major portion of the

workforce. For instance the Gen Y’s are willing to work for longer hours but are more concerned

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 84

about the conflict between work and family as compared to baby boomers. They are more likely

to embrace change within an organizational structure and be given opportunities for promotion

and validation. They do not like to be micro managed, and for them work should be interesting

and fun.

Conflict styles

Conflict has been defined as the process in which one party perceives that its interests are

being thwarted/ opposed or negatively affected by another party. The conflict process can be

triggered by differences in goals, values, tasks or due to inadequate resources, transparency,

communication etc. It is assumed that individuals generally adopt conflict styles that are

compatible to their individual goals and values in an organizational setting. As human beings

interact in organizations, differing values and situations create conflicts between people .Modern

theorists opine that when conflict is recognized, and managed in a proper manner, personal and

organizational benefits are seen (Silverthorne, 2005). Conflict when left unmanaged can lead to

diminished cohesiveness amongst employees, productivity and reduced organizational fitness.The

effect of conflict whether positive or negative depends on the person who manages it and the

adoption of the right conflict resolution style. In this context, we find ample scope for conflicts

between generations as each generational cohort have their own values, beliefs and attitudes.

Conflict styles can be defined as the style that an individual chooses to satisfy oneself or others

(Womack, 1988). Some of the styles of the persons involved in a conflict can play a critical role

(either be individuals, or as groups). Certain styles promote a search for solutions while some lead

to a deadlock and result in strained relations. Several styles have been identified by theorist – one

of the early theories of conflict style resolution was one-dimensional proposed by Mary P Follet

(1924) where three styles were proposed – domination compromise and integration and added two

more secondary styles namely avoidance and suppression. Later, Blake and Mouton (1964)

developed the managerial grid, which included two dimensions: concern for production and

concern for people with four styles–forcing (low-low for both, smoothing, compromising and

problem solving (high- high for both). Thomas and Kilmann (1974, 1977) based on the work of

Blake and Mouton labelled two components of conflict behavior as assertiveness and

cooperativeness. Assertiveness was a behavior that satisfies one’s own concern, and

cooperativeness was a behavior that satisfies another person’s concerns. These two dimensions

yield the five conflict management styles of competitiveness, accommodation, compromise,

avoiding, and collaboration. This model has been one of the popular models. Pruitt (1983)

suggested dual concern model with four styles –yielding, problem solving, contending and

inaction. Rahim & Bonomo (1979,1983) came with a differentiation with two dimensions namely

– concern for self and concern for others which basically portrays the motivational orientation of

an individual at the time of conflict. Rahim’s model is based on five conflict handling approaches

namely integrating, obliging, dominating, avoiding and compromising. All the styles however

converge into the perceptions of the conflicting parties when conflicts arise between two parties it

may either lead to resignation to fate or a power struggle Pareekh & purohit (2010) proposed that

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 85

the perception of the conflicting groups should be used to understand the modes of conflict

management. They suggested two modes of conflict management – approach and avoidance.

Avoidance is based on fear and dysfunctional while approach is based on hope and functional.

Avoidance is typified by a tendency to deny ,rationalise or avoid the problem, to displace anger

or aggression or to use emotional appeals while approach orientation is characterised by making

efforts to find a solution by one’s own efforts or with the help of others .This dimension has been

used in understanding conflict styles of managers (Pareek 1987). The instrument used for this

study takes in this concept and has identified five styles

 Resignation (Avoidance mode) – The extreme mode may turn to be fatal as it result in state

of helplessness due to hostility of the other group or ignoring the conflict by denying an

unpleasant situation and let the conflict resolve in its due course

 Withdrawal (Avoidance mode) – This mode of conflict tries to get away from the conflict

situation by avoiding/withdraw from the conflict when it takes place /physical

separation/defining boundaries between the conflicting parties

 Confrontation (Approach mode) - In this mode the parties fight out the issue to get a

solution which may result in the win-lose trap as both parties have opposing interest and

are unreasonable

 Compromise (Approach mode) – This mode is the process of sharing the gains but with

little efforts to resolve the conflict

 Negotiation (Approach mode) – The most satisfactory mode when both the groups jointly

confront the problem and explore the situation

Establishing research findings on multigenerational conflict styles is relatively at an early

stage. Since workplace diversity in terms of multigenerations would be an inevitable

phenomenon in the future, empirical studies are needed to establish the differences and to study

how these generations interact while at work and how organisations can be responsive enough to

understand these styles to make workplaces ready for these generations. This paper therefore is an

attempt to identify the styles that Gen y adopts while in conflict with others.

Research methodology

Conflict styles has been measured using the conflict resolution Inventory (CRI) instrument

prepared by S Purohit, which measures the five dimensions namely confrontation, compromise ,

negotiation, withdrawal and resignation. The instrument contains 20 items that measure the five

dimensions of conflict styles and the spilt half reliability for the instrument was found to be 0.516.

These five styles are using the approach avoidance mode of conflict management. The study

sample consisted of 136 respondents of whom 61 % were males and 39 % females. A cross section

of the sample was done in terms of the background of the students. Out of 137 respondents 35 %

hail from an urban background 23.5% from a rural background and 41.5 % from a semi-urban

background.

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 86

Based on the review of literature the key objectives of this study were

1. To find the preferred conflict style of gen y students.

2. To find out the most dominant style followed

3. To assess whether male and females have the same style

4. To identify conflict style of students with work experience

5. To see whether the background of the students decide the conflict style of the students

Analysis of data

To verify the objectives of the study simple statistical tools like the mean and standard

deviation was used. Data was collected from around 136 respondents from the city of Cochin also

known as Ernakulam in the state of Kerala.

TABLE 2: Mean score and standard deviation of Conflict Styles of Gen y students

Conflict Styles Mean SD

Compromise 12.40 3.04

Resignation 12.25 3.09

Withdrawal 12.36 2.86

Negotiation 13.20 3.26

Confrontation 11.61 2.93

The five conflict styles and their preference by the students were noted using the CRI

instrument. The mean scores and the standard deviation of the respondents preference towards

each style is presented in Table 2. The study consisted of 136 college students undergoing

undergraduate, post graduate and technical course from Ernakulam. The most preferred conflict

style from the study was found to be negotiation followed by the compromise. Both are the

approach modes of conflict, while the least preference was given to the confrontation mode.

TABLE 3: Mean score and standard deviation of Conflict Styles across the gender

Conflict Styles Male Female

Mean SD Mean SD

Compromise 12.88 3.03 11.63 2.93

Resignation 12.38 2.84 12.02 3.47

Withdrawal 12.12 2.78 12.73 2.97

Negotiation 13.49 3.36 12.73 3.09

Confrontation 12.01 2.55 10.83 3.36

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 87

Conflict styles of males and females were analyzed and the mean scores and standard

deviation of the two groups are presented in Table 3. This shows that males and females had a

marked difference in the conflict styles preferred. The highest mean score for males was for the

negotiation style (approach) and compromise (approach) respectively, while for the females

highest mean scores were for withdrawal and negotiation style. It can be inferred that males

preferred an approach style while females preferred both approach mode and avoidance approach

ie the withdrawal. Withdrawal mode means getting away from the conflict situation which could

be in different forms, either by avoiding conflict situations, physically separating one self, or

withdrawing from the situation of conflict. This difference across the gender could be because of

the nurturing in the society as females are groomed to be caring and sensitive while men are

groomed to be more aggressive and daring in their interpersonal relation.

TABLE: 4 Mean score and standard deviation Experience and Conflict Styles of students

Conflict Styles Experienced Inexperienced

Mean SD Mean SD

Compromise 12.23 3.55 12.47 2.79

Resignation 12.0 3.05 12.36 3.12

Withdrawal 12.41 2.0 12.33 3.19

Negotiation 13.74 2.96 12.94 3.39

Confrontation 11.82 2.63 11.43 3.07

To identify the conflict style of respondents with experience, they were categorized into

experienced and inexperienced and mean scores were taken. Table 4 shows the mean and standard

deviation scores of the preferred conflict style of experienced and the inexperienced category. Of

the study sample 68% had no work experience and 32 % had prior work experience of which 94%

had only up to two years of experience. It was found that students with prior work experience had

a greater tendency to use the approach mode of conflict ie the negotiation style. This style tries to

explore a solution by both the conflicting parties trying to confront the problem jointly. Withdrawal

is also used by this group, which indicates that they do have a tendency to withdraw from the

conflict situation too. When conflict is involved individuals will be concerned about the actual

conflict but also with the aftermath of the conflict as to what actions the superiors might take and

to what extent they will be protected at the workplace. Preference to the withdrawal style could be

because of these reasons. In the case of students who do not have prior work experience, the most

favored conflict style is the approach modes of conflict ie negotiation & compromise. A seemingly

evident difference was not observed in the conflict style preference based on the factor called

experience, as the mean scores were closer.

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 88

TABLE : 5 Mean score and standard deviation of the background of the students and

Conflict Styles

Conflict

Styles

Rural Semi Urban Urban

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Compromise 13.68 2.53 11.95 2.62 12.05 3.61

Resignation 12.04 2.92 12.52 3.09 12.05 3.25

Withdrawal 11.8 2.89 12.55 3.44 12.51 1.95

Negotiation 13.12 3.38 13 3.38 13.49 3.11

Confrontation 12.56 2.83 11.05 2.83 11.49 3.02

An analysis as to the conflict style preferences on the students based on the background from which

they hail was done to assess whether there existed any difference. The students were categorized

as urban, semi urban and rural. Table 5 presents the mean & SD scores of each of these categories

based on their background. In Indian context individual from the rural background has a

collectivist orientation- which means they are more concerned about others feelings and

accommodate accordingly and try to maintain interpersonal relations and hence have a greater

inclination towards the approach modes. In our analysis too, students from the rural background

prefer compromise and then negotiation style. In these two styles bargaining takes place as the

parties share gains as the intent is to continue relationships but need not result in a win-win

situation always. India has a collectivist culture, but individuals hailing from a urban /semi urban

are technologically advanced and connected to the world and would have a western influence in

their orientation though not highly individualistic as seen in the US counterparts. This group has

given preference to the negotiation mode and then the withdrawal style of conflict handling.

Conclusion and limitations of the study

From the study we can conclude that the male students prefer the approach modes of

conflict and the females have a mixed preference of both approach and avoidance. It was observed

that an extreme mode of approach/avoidance ie the confrontation/resignation was not much

preferred by this group. This could be partly attributed to the collectivist culture that Indians have.

The conflict styles and the experience factor were studied and the study revealed that students who

had prior work experience had a tendency to use the negotiation and withdrawal mode, while the

inexperienced students favored the approach modes of conflict handling. This shift could be

because the experienced category surveyed in this study were relatively novices in the field and

more concerned about making the superiors satisfied so that they need not face the aftermath of

the conflict and therefore preferred the withdrawal style too. The background of the individuals

seems to be a factor in deciding the conflict style adopted as it is seen in the study that individual

from rural backgrounds have higher mean score for the approach mode of conflict handling.

Students from the semi urban and urban backgrounds had a mixed approach where they are more

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 89

inclined to negotiation and withdrawal style. An understanding of the conflict styles that the gen

y is likely to adopt while in conflict situations would be of immense use for the superiors and

human resource professionals as this knowledge on how gen y are likely resolve conflicts would

be of great advantage. Though differences exist, how each generation try to resolve the conflict is

important. It is seen in the study that the gen y students in the Indian context do not prefer a

confrontation mode in resolving conflicts, rather prefer to negotiate or withdraw while in conflict.

The area researched is extremely relevant in the coming years anywhere across the globe

and this study was done in one country and in a small city ,therefore more empirical research

needs to be done on a wider population. The conflict styles of only a homogenous group of young

college students’ were assessed; therefore it cannot be generalized to a non student sample. A

comparative study of conflict styles both gen x and geny could be done to see whether there is any

marked difference as portrayed in the literature review while at workplace. Limited research work

has been done in this direction. Researchers can extend the study by including other variables like

cultural orientation, gender role, organizational status, importance of conflict situations etc with a

wider group for a generalization of conflict styles.

References

Feiertag, J., & Berge, Z. L. (2008). Training generation N: How educators should approach the net

generation. Education & Training, 50(6), 457-464.

Dwyer, R. J. (2009). Prepare for the impact of the multi-generational workforce! Transforming

Government: People, Process and Policy, 3(2), 101-110.

Pied piper to the Y generation. (2010). Development and Learning in Organizations, 24(4), 23-

26.

Haynes, B. P. (2011). The impact of generational differences on the workplace. Journal of

Corporate Real Estate, 13(2), 98-108.

Eric Wynn.(2012), Generation Y Within the Workforce: The Potential Conflicts of This Cohort

and Its Impact on Organizations, Yahoo! Contributor Network

Brewer, Brian; Lam, Gilbert K. Y,( 2009), Conflict Handling Preferences: A Public-Private

Comparison ,Public Personnel Management;38 (3), 1-14

Pareek Udai., & Purohit Surabhi (2010),Training instruments in HRD & OD.3rd edn,322-

327,471-473.

Mcshane L Steven,VonGlinow, MaryAnn, Sharma,R, Radha ,Organizational Behaviour, Tata

McGrawhill India ,2008 ,394

International Journal of Global Business, 6 (1), June 2013 81-90 90

Mukundan Smarty & K A Zakkariya (2013) ,Emotional Intelligence as a determinant of

Conflict Style Adoption of Managers: A theoretical perspective, International Journal

of Social Sciences And Interdisciplinary Research,2(2),148-154

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited withoutpermission.