A STUDY OF FACTORS THAT GENERATE CONFLICT BETWEEN
GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS AND
EDUCATIONAL MANAGERS IN ADDIS ABABA
ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
A Thesis presented to The School of Graduate Studies
ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Masters of Education in
Educational Planning and Management
By
Gebretensay Tesfay
May, 2002
ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
A Study of Factors that Generate conflict
between Government Secondary School
Teachers and Educational Managers in
Addis Ababa Administrative Region
By
Gebretensay Tesfay
Approved by Examining Board
________________________
Chairman, Department Graduate
__________
Committee
________________________
__________
Examiner
________________________
__________
Examiner
________________________
Advisor
__________
DECLARATION
I, the undersigned, declare that this thesis is my work and that all
sources of material used for the thesis have been duly acknowledged.
Name: Gebretensay Tesfay
Signature:
Date of submission: May 30,2002
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to my advisor Ato Haileselassie
Woldegerima for his continuous and unreserved effort made me to work hard on
this paper. I am also very much indepted to him for his critical review of each
and every piece of the work and constructive comment.
I would also like to express my appreciation to my friends: Dr Nuru
Mohammed, Ato Dereje Asfaw, Ato Kebede Biru, Ato Workiye Tegegn and
members of my staff for their helpful encouragement and suggestions provided
to me.
At last, but not least, my heartful thanks goes to Weizero Genent Demissie for
providing me with computer services in writing this thesis
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................
ABSTRACT ..................................................................
1. INTRODUCATION ............................................................
PAGE
I
iv
V
1
1.1 Background of the Study ..............................................
1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ..............................................
5
1.3 Significance of the Study ...............................................
7
1.4 Delimitation of the Study ...............................................
8
1.5 Research Design and Methodology ...............................
8
1.5.1 Sampling Technique and Population ...................
9
1.5.2 Data Gathering Instruments .................................
10
1.5.3 Method of Data Analysis .....................................
10
1.6 Limitation of the Study ..................................................
11
1.7 Definition of Terms .......................................................
12
1.8 Organization of the Study ..............................................
12
2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LLITERATURE ..................
13
2.1 The Nature of Conflicts in Educational Organization.....
13
2.2 View point Toward conflict ...........................................
15
2.2.1 Traditional View of Conflict ..............................
16
2.2.2 The Contemporary View point of Conflict .........
18
2.2.3 Negative and Positive Outcomes of conflict.....
19
2.3 Types of Conflict and their Major Sources /causes/ ....
26
2.3.1 Common Sources of Conflict ...............................
26
2.3.2 Intrapeersonal Conflict and its Sources ...............
29
2.3.3 Interpersonal Conflict and its Sources ...............
30
2.3.4 Intragroup Conflict and its Sources ...................
31
ii
2.3.5 Intergroup Conflict and its Sources ...................
32
2.4 Conflict Management ........................................................
35
2.4.1 Managing Conflict in General .............................
35
2.4.1.1 managing Intrapersonal conflict ....................
39
2.4.1.2 Managing Interpersonal Conflict ...................
39
2.4.1.3 Managing Intragroup Conflict .......................
42
2.4.1.4 Managing Intergroup Conflict ......................
42
2.4.2 The Role of Educational Leaders in the
Management of Conflicts ....................................
43
3. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA ...
46
3.1 Description of the Sample Population ............
46
3.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation ....................
50
3.2.1 Views of Conflict ........................................
52
3.2.2 Intrapersonal Conflicts ...............................
56
3.2.3 Interpersonal Conflicts ..............................
61
3.2.4 Intragroup conflicts ...................................
64
3.2.5 Intergroup Conflict ...................................
66
3.2.6 Types of Conflicts in Secondary Schools ..
71
3.2.7 Common Sources of Conflict ....................
72
3.2.8 Conflict management ................................
74
4. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .
4.1 SUMMARY ..................................................
4.2 CONCLUSION .............................................
4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................
APPENDICES .....................................................
iii
81
81
83
86
89
94
LIST OF TABLES
Table
pages
1. Characteristics of the respondents ....................................
47
2.Views of conflict ..............................................................
52
3. Intrapersonal conflict and its sources ..............................
57
4. Interpersonal conflict and its sources ..............................
62
5. Intergroup conflict and its sources ..................................
64
6. Intergroup conflict and its sources ..................................
67
7. Types of conflict in secondary schools ..........................
71
8. Common sources of conflict in sec. schools ...................
72
9. Managerial efficiency of educational managers ..........
75
10. Conflict management strategies ....................................
79
iv
ABSTRACT
The main aim of this study was to investigate the factors that generate
conflict between secondary school teachers and educational managers
(at school, zonal and regional level). It also looked into the different
forms of conflict at individual, interpersonal, group and intergroup
levels. In doing so, attempts were made to identify the types and cause
of conflicts, conflict resolving mechanisms and the major roles of
educational leaders in the management of conflicts.
Hence, the sample population used in the study consisted of 310
randomly selected teachers and educational managers drawn from the
six zones of Addis Ababa Administrative region and the Addis Ababa
Education Bureau included.
The percentages and the chi-square were the statistical methods used
in analyzing data.
The study showed that communication problems, outdated rules and
guidelines, bad work environment, and the incapability of educational
managers to deal with conflicts were some of the common sources of
conflicts which frequently occurred in secondary schools. In addition,
forcing, compromising and avoiding were found to be the most
frequently used techniques of managing conflict.
v
In general the findings revealed that the majority of the educational
managers lack the basic know how of managing conflicts. Teachers,
on the other hand, appeared to show high resistance to change.
Therefore, for the effectiveness of managing conflict processes and for
the purpose of getting balanced view of conflicts, special training for
both managers and teachers is recommended.
vi
CHAPTER ONE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Towards the end of the 19th century, several things accented the need for modern
education. The victory of Adwa in 1896 resulted in gaining international
recognition for the country so that several Europeans and Asian countries
expressed their wishes to establish embassies and negotiate treaties. The war
itself alerted Emperor Menelik to realize the inadequecies of church education if
Ethiopia was to remain independent.
The innovations introduced, such as the formation of the council of ministers,
the starting of postal, telephone, and telegraphic systems, the establishment of
the state bank and printing press, the construction of railway line etc, all
required a new type of personnel or qualified civil servants. Thus modern
education had to be started at the beginning of the 20th century and it officially
commenced in 1908 with the opening of Menilik II school in Addis Ababa
(Ayalew, 2000:8).
The introduction of modern Education in Ethiopia in 1908, has brought an
increasing demand for better and improved system of education. The need for
better and more schools become too obvious so as to cope with the new social,
psychological, and economic problems, by producing well prepared citizens.
This condition has brought an increasing effect on the number and quality of
teachers as well as administrative staff, making the management of schools more
complex, and challenging. The Government secondary schools of Addis Ababa
follow the same path of development.
1
It is well known that schools are mission centers for the teaching and learning
process. In the process of learning and teaching there is always a day to day
interaction in order to realize educational objectives. When people interact with
one another it is natural for conflicts to occur. Hence, it is possible to say that
conflict exists in situations where people with differing views and interests
interact with one another and unless properly handled, such conflict can
negatively affect the realization of the intended objectives.
The basic aim of educational management is to ensure that effective teaching
and good quality learning take place in school settings. Thus administrative
tasks undertaken by those who deal with the responsibility of running the school
must contribute to this aim. One such task relates to managing conflicts that
surface in the course of running the school. Unless educational managers learn
to deal with conflicts, it is impossible to get a smooth and progressive operation
of schools.
Conflict may take various forms and manifest itself at various levels. Kinard
(1988:304-307), for example, distinguishes between three types or levels of
conflict. First, conflict may occur within an individual, hence, an intrapersonal
conflict. The situations that give rise to such conflict are many. They range from
conflicting needs, frustrating situations, failing to achieve aspired goals. Second,
conflict may occur between individuals who are brought together in work places
or else where. Confrontations between individuals must often occur where they
have to compete for limited resources. Such conflict is often termed as
interpersonal conflict.
Thirdly, conflict may occur at the level of groups. There are several situations
that may turn groups into rivals. These include situations where groups have to
2
compete for limited resources such as money, personnel and equipment, or when
communication difficulties occur. Groups may also experience confrontations
because they promote different interests and goals.
Conflict may be viewed in two ways. For some people conflict in the work
environment is something to be feared and is thus to be avoided (Mowday,
1985: 419). According to this view conflict is undesirable and destructive. In
contrast to such a negative view, there exists another pragmatic view which
regards conflict not only as inevitable but also as desirable. In fact, those who
maintain this second view consider conflict as a stimulus for change, growth and
innovation (Campbell, et-al 1983:183). In strengthening the latter idea Kinard
(1988:303) argues that conflict can be seen as a fundamental and constructive
part of school organizations. So conflict is not just considered as the inevitability
of school life but it may also be seen as a process through which school grows
and develops over time. According to these views, effective administration lies
in one's ability to control and channel conflict to ensure the progress of an
organization rather than to eliminate it (Terry and Franklin, 1999:246).
Given such opposing views about conflict, this study attempts to identify the
causes of conflicts and, explore the factors that generate conflicts between
Government secondary School teachers and educational leaders of Addis Ababa
in a way to benefit the learning and teaching activities. Conflict in schools may
arise in different forms. For instance, Teachers do not seem to get along with
administrators. They do not want to follow school rules and regulations. On the
other hand, educational leaders seem to put pressure on teachers for the
uninterrupted operation of the school work. As a result, it is now common to
speak about the usual occurrence of conflict between administrators and
teachers. By indicating the causes, Chandan (1994:271) wrote , ''wherever there
3
is interaction, there is conflict and it can be considered as an expression of
hostility, antagonism and misunderstanding.'' Further, Glatter, et-al (1958:6)
argues that ''professionals, it has been claimed, are unreasonably resistant to
administrative control. Conflict can also originate from a number of different
sources. According to Hanson (1991:271), the possible sources of conflict are
poor communication, competition for common but scarce resources,
incompatible goals and the like.
Recognizing the fact that conflict is useful to organizational needed changes by
itself is not enough. In fact, managers of educational institutions and other
organizations must also accept that conflict may be harmful. They have to learn
to recognize the difference between constructive and destructive conflict
situations as noted by Rao and Narayan (1987:789). Educational leaders must
also consider in the face of a conflict situation whether or not the conflict is of
potential benefit to the organization. If it is useful, they should allow it to
continue or perhaps even help to intensify it while monitoring its progress. If the
conflict appears to be harmful, they should try to cope up with and find a means
to resolve it (Campbell et-al 1983:194). Moreover, ''organization's goal should
be to control conflict rather than to eliminate it'' (Huber, 1986:238). Effective
educational managers are problem solvers rather than problem avoiders. This is
because they accept problems as challenges and as an opportunity to prove their
worthiness for advancement (Williams, 1978:224-248).
Therefore, as long as there are interactions in school organization and conflict is
un avoidable, effective management is essential and the managers or educational
leaders are expected to know the factors that generate conflict and the possible
means of handling them for smooth operation of schools. To this end, the
researcher tries to focus on the major factors that initiate conflicts between
4
secondary school teachers and educational leaders and the way conflicts are
managed with particular reference to government secondary schools of Addis
Ababa.
1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Researchers such as Fikru (1993), Gonie (1998) have indicated that conflicts are
realities in Ethiopian schools. In line with these findings, Fikru (1993:3) based
on MOE reports identified the following major conflict generating factors:
Dissatisfaction of some teachers and other workers, unnecessarily dominating
(authoritative) principals, dissatisfaction in performance evaluation systems,
improper distribution of class load etc.
Nowadays, it is common to hear of the existence of conflicts between teachers
and educational leaders in Addis Ababa. It was an observed fact that the New
Education and Training Policy, which was issued by M.O.E. in 1994 has been
challenged and resisted by teachers and other professionals.
In secondary schools of Addis Ababa, it is observed that:
1) Teachers have long work experience; almost all are on the verge of retiring.
They are more or less running after salary increment, promotion and other
benefits. 2) The full day work has created grievances on the part of teachers 3)
There seems to be an unfair assignment of school principals and other
educational managers at various levels.
5
4) The competitive market situations also negatively contribute to the
dissatisfaction of individual teachers 5) The incompetency of educational
managers to understand the professional problems of teachers and their inability
to handle and solve the problems. 6) Lack of professionally committed
personnel in the education system. 7) Any challenge (conflict) is seen as
destructive.
In light of the stated problems, therefore, the major purpose of this study is to
investigate the factors that initiate conflict between secondary school teachers
and educational leaders. Efforts would also be made to examine what strategies
are employed to handle conflict in schools. Finally, an attempt is made to assess
the general view on the concept of conflict. Therefore, inorder to carry out these
objectives, attempts were made to seek answers for the following basic
questions.
1. How do secondary school teachers and educational managers view
conflicts?
2. What major types of conflicts are there in secondary schools?
3. What are the major sources or causes of conflict in secondary schools?
4. What strategies do educational leaders use to manage conflict?
1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Schools are the major social institutions where by the teaching and learning
process takes place. Therefore, problems which affect the Smooth operation of
the school need to be carefully examined. Appropriate strategies also need to be
assessed in order to overcome disruptive problems. Besides, educational leaders
6
by virtue of their position are key people for smooth running of schools. They
are working constantly with teachers and can only achieve maximum efficiency
when the relations with teachers are at satisfactory level. Hence, peaceful coexistence between teachers and educational administrators should
be
encouraged in order to set up conducive environment for teaching and learning
process.
Therefore, it is hoped that, the study would be of significance and is expected to
contribute to the following.
1. It will indicate the magnitude and sources of conflict so that the
concerned authorities can take measure to handle the problem.
2. It is hoped that it will supply the basic data for further in depth
study
3. It may also help practitioners to know the techniques of avoiding
undesirable conflicts and exploiting to benefit of the desirable ones.
4. It will help to recommend possible solutions.
1.4 DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY
Conflicts are becoming realities at all levels of the school system and all over
the country. It would be unpractical if attempts are made to examine conflicts at
all levels of the school system and in all regional states of the country. Because
it will be so vast to manage it. For this reason, the study will be delimited to 10
government secondary schools of Addis Abeba out of the 26 secondary schools
7
found in the six Zones of Addis Abeba, which are thought fairly represent the
population.
Furthermore, the study is delimited to the conflict between teachers and
educational leaders in order to make the research manageable. Besides, to make
the study more manageable, it is decided to delimit the types / levels/ of
conflicts from various levels into intrapersonal, interpersonal intragroup and
Inter group conflicts only.
1.5 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The method of research used to study the problem is the descriptive survey
method. This method is selected because the nature of the problem needs wide
description and investigation. The study is basically descriptive because it helps
to make detailed analysis of existing phenomena with the intent of employing
data to justify current conditions.
1.5.1. SAMPLING TECHNIQUE AND POPULATION
The population and sample schools are determined on the basis of the year 2001
Annual statistical report of Addis Ababa Education Bureau. According to the
report there are 26 government secondary schools staffed by 2340 teachers. To
achieve fair representation, random sampling technique is employed. After
randomly choosing ten schools out of the 26 government secondary schools, in
order to facilitate early access to reach the required respondents with the limited
8
time available at the researcher's disposal, the stratified, purposive and
availability sampling technique was used to sample teachers, principals and
other relevant educational leaders in the hierarcly such as zone and region
management committee members. Two hundred forty five (10% of the total
population) participated in the study; out of which the 55 are Associates, 118 are
senior teachers, 45 are middle and 27 are junior teachers, with the assumption
that it fairly represents the teacher population. Almost all zonal and regional
educational managers participated in the study. More specifically, 7 regional, 29
zonal and 29 school level educational managers participated in the study.
Because the teachers population is more or less homogeneous, the sample size
i.e., the 10% of the whole population is assumed to be reasonable. The number
of principals in the 26 government secondary schools of Addis Ababa are nearly
80, and taking the sample size 29 out of the 80 principals (i.e, 36%) is quite a
large representation. The rest, zonal and regional education leaders are taken
most of them i.e; 90% .
The sample schools are chosen from all the six zones of Addis Ababa taking a
fair representation. It is assumed that taking a sample from each zone fairly
represents the government secondary schools of Addis Ababa. Besides, the
selection is made on the bases of the size, geographical location and type of the
schools, (See the details in the appendix section).
1.5.2. DATA GATHERING INSTRUMENTS
The questionaire and the interview question items were prepared and
administered to principals, teachers and other educational managers at regional
and zonal levels. The questionaire was employed to obtain factual information,
9
opinions and attitudes from respondents. Where as interview is a means of
getting information directly from the subjects.
The questionaire was designed for teachers and educational managers, at all
levels (school, zone & region) where as, the interview was employed with the
top level regional educational leaders. Due to time and the status they posses,
the interview was considered as better instrument for managers i.e. the regional
education managers. The questionaire contains close and open-ended questions
to help the flow of adequate information as much as possible.
1.5.3 METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS
Depending on the nature of the basic questions to be addressed and variables to
be treated, the following statistical tools were used.
A percentage (%) and frequency distribution were used to determine the
personal characteristics of respondent and analyze their responses.
The chi-square (X2) was also used to check whether or not there exists a
significant difference between the groups of respondents i.e, educational
managers and teachers. This statistical test is choosen since the two groups
(teachers and managers) are independent, and the data are in terms of
frequencies in discrete categories. Since it includes all the rating scales possible,
it can reasonably show the relationship between the two independent groups.
1.6. LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
The study of conflicts, as managerial problems, on individual, group and
organizational levels require a long time and intensive follow up to get the
10
actual problem and its development. The researcher however was constrained by
shortage of time. Due to the shortage of time, the researcher was forced to stick
to the opinion of respondents only. It would have been nice, had I Interview
some of the teachers to explore additional information, rather than interviewing
only few managers.
As far as the willingness of respondents is concerned, very few of them were
reluctant to respond to the questionnaire and failed to return them.
1.7. DEFINITION OF TERMS
Educational leaders: - refers to management committees who are supposed to
manage educational institutions at regional, zonal and school levels.
Secondary school: - is a four- year- duration of general and streamed education
that ranges from grade 9 to 12 (MOE,1994:14-15). And the teachers in this case
are those who teach at this level and the schools are government schools.
Conflict:- is a disagreement between two or more organizational members
or group arising from the fact that they must share scarce resources or work
activities and/ or from the fact that they have different status, goals, values or
perceptions (plankett/ Attner, 1989: 436).
1.8 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
The research consists of four main chapters. Chapter one deals with the problem
and its approaches / Introduction/. The second chapter treats the review of the
related litrature. In the third chapter the analysis of data and interpretation is
11
presented. Finally, the last chapter comprises the summary, conclusions and
recommendations.
CHPTER TWO
2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITRATURE
2.1 THE NATURE OF CONFLICT IN EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
An organization comes into being when there are people who are to interact with
each other and who are prepared to put force and a unified effort in pursuit of a
common goal. When people interact with one another, it is natural for conflicts
to occur. Conflict in school organizations has been a common phenomenon for
a long period of time. It received different degree of emphasis from social
scientists during various periods of history. Thus, the phenomena related to
conflict have been deeply studied by philosophers, sociologists, economists,
political scientists, anthropologists, and psychologists. Management scholars
were interested in studying conflict in organizations in recent times (Rahim,
1986:11).
12
Among the classical philosophers, plato, and Aristotle stated the following about
conflict. They said'' order makes the good life and disorder the opposite; conflict
is a threat to the success of the state and should be kept off an absolute
minimum, and removed altogether if possible'' (Spika in Rahim, 1986:2).
The classical organizational theorists such as Taylor and Weber ( in Rahim,
1986:7) did not see to appreciate different impacts that conflict can have in an
organization. They prescribed organizational structures, rules and procedures,
hierarchy, channel of command, etc. so that organizational members would
unlikely engage in conflict. While the recent researchers have discovered that
organizational conflict is considered as legitimate, inevitable, and even a
positive indicator of effective management.
Today, a synthesis of the classical and modern viewpoints has brought us to
determine that the productive as well as destructive potentials of conflict exist in
school organizations. Furthermore, in the real world of educative organizations,
a significant of life is the presence of conflict in many forms and at various
levels of strength. It is becoming clearly among the most '' touchy'' topics in the
field of organizational behavior, undoubtedly because of the potential in every
conflict situation for destructive outcomes. Hence the central theme of the
contemporary behavioral science applied to conflict is that, with diagnosis and
management approaches available, it is possible not only to minimize the
destructiveness of conflict but also, in many cases, to deal with it productively.
Since educational organizations exist only to foster cooperative human endeavor
inorder to achieve goals that can not be achieved individually, their
13
organizational ideals normally call for cooperation, harmony, and collaboration
(Owens, 1998:230).
When people work cooperatively and harmoniously, with collaborative effort, it
is true for conflict to occur. Thus, because conflict is present in all human
experience, it is becoming an important aspect of organizational behavior in
education. That is why management scholars are interested in studying
organizational conflicts in recent times (Rahim, 1986:11).
Conflict can occur within and between persons or social units. It can also occur
between two or more people or social units. The litrature tries to confine itself to
conflicts in organizational life -organizational conflict. In most cases,
organizational conflicts involve interpersonal conflict and intergroup conflict
(Owens, 1998, 230).
2.2 VIEW POINTS ON CONFLICT
The way in which people handle conflict depends on how they view it. Some
people consider conflict as problematic, uncivilized or destructive. Others view
it as a natural and inevitable result of differences within the organization. Other
people also argue that it can have many benefits, which will be lost if it is
avoided or suppressed. For example, disagreement and conflict over plans and
goals can expose their weakness and lead to their eventual improvement, or
conflict may lead to needed organizational change (Billisbery, 1999:28).
Writers such as Hellriegel and Slocum (1982:637) state that; the word ''conflict'',
for many people, suggests negative situations such as war, destruction,
aggression, violence, and competition. For others, the word has a positive
14
connotations -excitement, intrigue, adventure, and challenge. Other people
respond to conflict with mixed feelings; this is probably the most realistic and
useful point of view of conflict for a manager.
According to Owens (1998:230), the existence of conflict is viewed as an
evidence of failure in the organization. The failure may be on the part of
managers to plan adequately and /or to exercise sufficient control mechanisms.
This is true in classical school of management theory. In human relations school
of thought, according to him, conflict is seen again as disruptive.
2.2.1 Traditional View of Conflict
Traditional view is the early approach to conflict and assumed that conflict was
bad, harmful and must be avoided. Infact the term conflict was used
synonymously with the term violence and destruction (Robbins, 1989:368). This
writer further suggested that many of the important institutions like schools used
to entertain this view of conflict. In school systems, conflict has been
discouraged, and has been recognized as bad for the school. In effect, managers
often were evaluated for the absence or presence of conflict.
In strengthening this idea, Plankett and Attner, (1989:439) stated the following.
A manger may view conflict as unnecessary and harmful
to an organization. If this is the philosophical foundation,
the manager's reaction would be to fear its occurrence
and to eliminate all evidence of conflict.
Luthan's (1981:381) traditional approach of organizational conflict was based on
the following four assumptions. 1) Conflict is by definition avoidable. 2)Conflict
is caused by trouble makers, boat rockers and prima donas. 3) Legalistic forms
15
of authority such as going through channels or ''sticking to the book'' are
emphasized. 4) Scape goats are accepted as inevitable
Ivancevich and Matteson (1990:303) also agree that the traditional perspective
of conflict asserts that all conflict is bad. They say since conflict is inherently
bad, it must be eliminated in the form of suppression.
Gray and Starke (1984:480) also argued that in the view of traditionalists,
organizational conflict was a proof that there was something '' wrong '' with the
organization. In this case, the traditional view assumed that performance
declined steadily as conflict increased. Gray and Starke's idea of the traditional
view of conflict can be summarized in the following figure.
High
organizational
performance
High
Low
level of conflict
fig- The traditional view to conflict
In the traditional view point of conflict, it is observed that many educational
managers attempt to eliminate all types of conflict, whether functional or
dysfunctional. The reason for this according to Ivancevich and Matteson
(1990:307) is:
1) In school systems, conflict has been discouraged; teachers had all the
answers, and both teachers and children were rewarded for orderly classrooms
16
2) Manager often are evaluated and rewarded for the lack of conflict in their
areas of responsibility.
2.2.2 The Contemporary View Point of Conflict
Currently, organizational conflict is viewed as neither good nor bad, but is
inevitable. Thus, whether we like it or not, conflict will exist or will occur even
if organizations have paid great sacrifice to prevent it (Gray and Strake,
1984:481).
Ivancevich and Matteson (1990:303) describe the contemporary viewpoint of
conflict in the following manner:
Too much conflict can have negative consequences because it
requires time and other resources to deal with it and diverts
energy that could more constructively be applied else where.
Too little conflict, on the other hand can also be negative in
that such a state can lead to apathy and lethargy and provide
little or no impetus for change and innovation.
That is to say if every thing is going smoothly i.e if there is no conflict, the
desire of people to make changes in the organization will become very less.
According to Ivancevich and Matteson, '' the critical issue is not conflict itself
but how conflict is managed.''
Other writers such as Terry and Franklin (1991:246) argue that ''conflict exists
in all organizations despite the finest formal organizations and the most cohesive
informal organization.'' According to them, it is reasonable to expect difference
of opinions, beliefs and ideas among managers and workers, between
17
departments and between other groups in the organization. Therefore, since
conflict is the inevitable accompaniment of change, the challenge is not to
prevent the conflict arising, but to identify the outcome of conflict and find the
best ways to manage it (Brown,et -al 1995:184). The modern view of conflict
does not encourage the elimination of conflict but rather to manage conflict so
that it can help groups and individuals perform better (Mowday, 1985:419).
Mowday further argued that ''the important task for the manager is to channel
conflict so that its consequences are more likely to enhance than to impede
effectiveness''.
Thus, from the contemporary view point of conflict, Luthan (1981:382)
summarized that: Conflict is inevitable; determined by structural factors such as
the physical shape of a building, the design of a career structure, or the nature of
a class system; is integral to the nature of change; and a minimal level of
conflict is optimal.
2.2.3 Negative and Positive Outcomes of Conflict
The contingency model of conflict which was set by Hellriegel and Slocum
(1982:637) treats conflict in a balanced manner. That is to say conflict has both
positive and negative aspects and hence it has to be managed. According to
Hellriegel and Slocum, ''proper management of conflict usually minimizes
negative effects and maximizes positive effects''.
Negative outcomes of conflict are known as dysfunctional outcomes of conflict.
Different scholars use the words ''negative'' and ''dysfunctional'' interchangeably
when dealing with conflict. The negative views of conflict
18
are the destructive forms of conflict. Dysfunctional conflict is any confrontation
or interaction between groups that harms the organization or hinders the
achievement of organizational goals. Management members are always in a
position to eliminate dysfunctional conflict (Ivancevich and Matteson,
1990:304).
Most people can think of conflict situations in their organizations that have
diverted time, energy and money away from the organization's goals. More over,
it is entirely possible for such a situation to turn into continous conflict and
cause further harm to the organization (williams, 1978:139). Likewise,
Campbell, Carbally, and Nystrand (1983:189) indicate that most administrators
are attuned to the dysfunctional rather than the functional outcomes of conflict
and thus they view conflict as un pleasant and disruptive, and that it leads to
disintegration of relationships and hinders the achievement of goals.
If conflict lasts for a long time or if it becomes intense, it will have a negative
effect. At the interpersonal level, co-operation and team work may deteriorate
and distrust may grow among people who need to cooperate in their efforts. For
individuals, some may feel defeated, while the self-image of others will decline.
Consequently, the predictability and the motivation level of some employees
will be reduced (Davis and Newstorm, 1989:257). According to Williams
(1978:139), conflict may cause one or more employees to leave the
organization. It can also adversely affect the health of the involved parties.
Intense conflict can lead to sabotage, stealing, lying, distortion of reality
(information), and similar behavior that can have a negative effect on the
organization.
Other writers like Hellriegel and Slocum (1982:637) also agree with the above
statements. They say, intense conflict often leads to biased perception and goal
19
distortion. This can cause managers to make a decision that increases conflict
rather than reduce or resolve it. They also see it from control stand point i.e,
managers might dislike conflict because they believe that it interferes with
productivity and efficiency. To negative oriented people, conflict is seen as
evidence of failure to develop appropriate norms in the organization (Owens,
1987:244).
Hunt (1992:101) generally listed six points with regard to the negative aspects of
conflict. These are; conflict may: 1) Prevent members from 'seeing' task at all; 2)
Dislocate the entire group and produce polarizations; 3) Subvert the objectives
in favour of sub-goals; 4) Lead people to use defensive and blocking behavior in
their group; 5) Result in the disintegration of the entire group; and 6) Stimulate a
wine-lose conflict, where reason is secondary to emotion. Gray and Starke
(1984:489) also identified three negative outcomes of conflict listed as follows;
1) A decline in communication between the conflicting parties 2) Hostility and
agression development 3) Over conformity to group demands.
There are also positive outcomes of conflict. These are often called functional
conflicts. Functional conflict is a confrontation between group that enhances and
benefits the organization's performance. Without functional conflict in
organizations, there is a possibility to have little commitment to change, and
most likely groups would become stagnant. Hence, managers in any
organization would like to encourage such kind of conflict (Ivancevich and
Matteson, 1990:304).
Positive or functional conflicts result in an urge for excellence and creativity.
Such conflicts take the form of healthy competition (interpersonal or intergroup
competion). With such type of competition, Pareek (1982:45) said; better ideas
20
are produced, people are forced to search for new approaches, long standing
problems are dealt with people and are forced to clarify their ideas, and the
tension stimulates interest and creativity.
Conflict and disagreement between decision makers can improve organizational
decision making. Despite this, evidence of the researches have shown that
decision makers disliking conflicts may lead to the reduction of conflicts but
understress (Janis and Mann in schwenk, 1990:436).
Conflict can also indicate the need for adjustments in managerial process (such
as organizational structure, decision making systems, planning) or in behavioral
process (such as motivation, communication, or leadership patterns). In addition,
conflict provides managers or administrators with information about their
operations and show where corrective actions might be needed (Hellriegel and
Slowm, 1982:638).
Luthans (1981:383) also pointed out that conflict stimulates managers to search
ways to reduce or resolve the disagreements, and this process often lead to
innovation and change.
According to Davis and Newstrom (1989:257), one of the benefits of conflict is
that people are stimulated to search for improved approaches that lead to better
results. It energizes them to be more creative and to experiment with new ideas.
Another benefit is that once hidden problems are brought to the surface, they
may be confronted and solved.
21
Thomas in Mathur and Sayeed (1983:177) also suggested about the benefits of
conflict. He said that the confrontation of different views coming out from
different parties to the surface, produce ideas of good quality. The divergent
views which are based on differences in opinion, evidence, considerations,
orientations and frames of reference are helpful for taking comprehensive view
of things by synthesizing the elements of one's own and of others in a more
fruitful way. According to Williams (1978:349), Rue and Byars (1989:139) and
Hunt (1992:101), conflict has the following Benefits, 1) Conflict usually causes
changes; 2) Conflict activates people; 3) Conflict is a form of communication; 4)
Conflict can be healthy in that it relieves pent -up emotions and feelings; 5)
Conflict can be educational; and 6) The aftermath of conflict can be a stronger
and better work environment.
Another writer Billisbery (1999:30) listed the following three benefits of
conflict.
1.Conflict improves interpersonal relation:- People need room to release their
strong feelings (such as angers) that are likely to have because of the aspects of
their works and their workmates. This is probably healthier than hiding the
anger or resentment.
2. Conflict improves group dynamics:- conflict can help to improve group
dynamics by revealing personal agendas and laying the foundation for
appropriate group goals, norms and procedures.
22
3. Conflict improves ideas and practices:- Hearing alternative ideas
and
suggestions from others may enable to a group to arrive at a better solution to
the problem at hand.
Gray and Starke (1984:488-489) also identified the positive outcomes of conflict
and are listed as follows. 1. The energy level of groups or individuals increases
with conflict; 2. Group cohesion increases;
3) Problems are made known during conflict; 4. Conflict motivates groups to
clarify their objectives, and this increases the group's awareness of its purpose;
5) Conflict encourages group to protect values they think are important; 6)
Individuals or groups are motivated to mobilize information that is relevant to
the conflict-Additional information is usually developed that can be helpful in
resolving the problem; 7. Conflict can increase an organization's overall
effectiveness because it forces groups or individuals to adapt to the changing
external environment that the organization faces.
23
An overview of the positive and negative effects of intergroup conflict is summarized by
Hellriegel and Slocum (182:667) in the following table
Characteristics
Positive
negative
intergroup conflict
effects
effects
- increases motivation
-Decreases motivation
-contributes to a system
-may deprive higher
of checks and balances
level management of
-increases number of new
information
Competition
ideas to compete with
established ones
Concealment and
- Lowers quality of
distortion of
decisions
information
Appeals to superiors
superior becomes more
-superior
for decisions
informed about operations and overloaded by referrals
subordinates
may
become
-may lead to foring with superior
- may lead to confrontation with handing down edicts without full
superior
as
a
third
party knowledge
facilitator
Rigidity &formality
-may increase stability in the
-may
lower
in decision procedures
system
change
Decreased rate of
-may decrease problem if a group -
Inter group interaction
or person is used to provide the implementation of tasks
hinders
adaptability
coordination
to
and
necessary liaison
Low
trust,
hostility
suspicion, -Increased cohesion with group
contributing to cooperation
within group
24
psychological
strain
turnover of personnel
and
Whether conflict is viewed as constructive or destructive depends on the
position and viewpoint of the people observing it. A despute between two
departmental managers over their respective share of new resources may benefit
the organization, because it may create a better understanding of the two
department's needs
In conclusion, constructive conflict can lead to improved relationship between
individuals and groups and to new and better understanding of organizational
problems. It also tends to be integrative, or at the least will stop desputes
between the conflicting parties. In contrast, destructive conflict leads to the
polarization of views and the reduction of effective cooperation between the
parties involved. When the distrust between the parties continues, the conflict is
more likely to be destructive (Billisbery, 1999:31). And of course proper
conflict management and resolution is sought.
2.3 TYPES /LEVELS/ OF CONLICT AND THEIR MAJOR SOURCES /CAUSES/
2.3.1 Common Sources of Conflict
In many cases, the signs of conflict are obvious and visible. There may be
arguments, raised tempers and emotions, possibly even fighting or formal
desputes (Billisbery, 1999:28). This writer argued that there are also hidden
conflicts, which are submerged below the surface of the organization. However,
there is usually something visible above the surface if you look carefully.
According to Billisbery, some signs of potential hidden conflict include: a)
Coolness or rigid formality in relations between parties involved; b)
Uncomfortable silences at meetings, and; c) Constant referral to formal rules and
procedures: Kinard (1988:310) explained how conflict can occur. He said
25
''conflict commonly occurs between line, and between union and non-union
members, and between informal groups and formal organizations''. According to
Kinard conflict can arise between the individual and the organization, between
individuals, within the individual him/her self, between groups and individuals,
and between groups in the organization.
According to Plankett and Attner (1989:437), the sources of conflict include;
shared resources, differences in goals, difference in perceptions and values,
disagreements in the role requirements, nature of work activities, individual
approaches, and the stage of organizational development.
Gray and Stark (1984:483-486) suggested that there are six sources of conflict.
These are: 1) Limited resources; 2) Interdependent work activities; 3)
Differentiation of activities; 4) Communication problems; 5) Differences in
perceptions; 6) The environment of the organization. According to these writers,
conflict can also arise from a number of other sources, such as:1) Individual
differences (some people enjoy conflict while others don't); 2) Unclear authority
structures (people don't know how far their authority extends); 3) Differences in
attitudes; 4) Task symmetries (one group is more powerful than another and the
weaker group tries to change the situation; 5) Difference in time horizons (some
departments have a long-run view and others have a short -run view). Another
author Deutch in camp bell et-al (1983:187) identified a list of sources of
conflict. These are; control over resources, preferences and nuisances, values,
beliefs, and the nature of relationships between the parties.
There are also factors conducive to conflict that are potential sources with
organization, particularly in schools. It is said that professionals employed in an
organization develop difficulties in their relationships, not only with their clients
or the public at large, but also with their bosses (Glatter et-al, 1988:6)
26
Before looking at the actual management side of conflict, it is proper to see the
distinct types of conflict. However, different scholars have divided the types of
conflict differently according to their views.
Luthan (1981:371) identified two types of conflict. These are:
1) Intrapersonal conflict
(which includes frustration, goal conflict, role
conflict and ambiguity).
2) Interpersonal conflict (which results when two or more persons are
interacting with one another).
Rue and Byars (1989:142) divided conflict into two types: internal (within the
individual) and external (outside to the individual). Gordon (1987:475) also
identified three levels of conflict: intrapersonal and interpersonal, intragroup and
intergroup, and intra organizational and inter organizational.
Nevertheless, researchers such as Fikru (1993) and Gonie
(1998) have
discovered that school conflicts could be stratified on the basis of individual,
group, and the organization at which they occur. In these regard, school conflicts
may be leveled out, as intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup, and intergroup
conflicts as stated by Rahim (1986:16-17).
2.3.2 Intrapersonal Conflict and its Sources
Intrapersonal conflict is caused by poor person- environment fit, poor time
management, underestimation or over estimation of skills, and assigned tasks
27
that do not bring much goals, interests, values or abilities, lack of confidence,
feeling of powerlessness etc (Hanson, 1996:263).
The primary sources of intrapersonal conflict as suggested by Kinard (1988:309)
are; conflicting needs, role ambiguity, incompatibility of organizational and
personal values. At the individual level, behavioral scientists have asserted
personality as '' The dynamic organization within the individual of those need
dispositions that govern his/her unique reactions to the environment ''(Getzels in
campbell et- al, 1983:184). In other words, individuals with the same formal
responsibility in a school organization may perceive these differently because of
differences in their personalities. There are three basic types of intrapersonal
conflicts as indicated by Kundu and Tutoo (1989:539). These are:
1) Approach-Approach conflict,(refers to the conflict between positive
valences that are equal in strength).
2) Approach- Avoidance conflict, (occurs when a person has to deal with a
situation which possesses both positive and negative aspects).
3) Avoidance- Avoidance conflict, (occurs when each of the competing
alternatives possesses negative consequences).
Intrapersonal conflict exists within an individual him/her self. It arises from
conflicting goals and interests, lack of required ability for a particular job, lack
of facilities, rules and regulations and when his/ her path is blocked by other
people. Such conflicts can cause a person frustrations, tension and
anxiety (Rashid and Archer (1983:312).
In general, the sources of intrapersonal conflict are mainly structural; they are
situational imposed, and these are mainly characterized in the form of five
identified antecedents (sources) of intrapersonal conflicts. Rahim's (1986: 4950) survey report identifies the major causes of such conflict as:
28
1) Misassignment and goal in congruous, 2) Inappropriate demand on capacity,
3) Organizational structure (i.e. creating conflicting goals, policies, and delayed
decisions), 4) Supervisory styles, and 5) Position
2.3.3 Interpersonal Conflict and its Sources
This type of conflict occurs between one individual and another who are brought
together in work places or else where. Confrontations between individuals is
often occurring where they have to compete for limited resources (Kinard,
1988:305). Most employees are concerned about their position, status, power
etc, within the organization and resent any encroachment on them. Also they are
often competing with each other for recognition, approval and promotion
(Rashid and Archer, 1983:317)
Kinard (1988:309) identified three primary sources of interpersonal conflict.
These are 1) Personality difference, 2) Power struggles, and 3) Competition.
Interpersonal conflict involves conflict between two or more individuals and is
probably the most common and most recognized conflict. This may involve
conflict between two departmental managers who are competing for limited
capital and manpower resources. Likewise, interpersonal conflicts can develop
when there are three equally deserving professors and they are all up for
promotion, but only one of them can be promoted because of budget and
positional constraints (Chandan, 1994:274). According to him, interpersonal
conflicts can also be expressed by disagreements over goals and objectives of
the organization. For example, some members of a school board may like to
offer courses in sex education while others may find this proposal morally
offensive and thus causing conflict. Hunt (1979:73-74) also described about the
occurrence of interpersonal conflict. He said. It occurs between two or more
29
persons when attitudes, motives, values, expectations, or activities are
incompatible and if the individuals perceive themselves to be in disagreement.
Interpersonal conflict, as stated by Hellriegel and Slocum (1982:654) is caused
by: 1) disagreement over policies, practices, plans and; 2) emotional issues
involving negative feeling, such as anger, distrust, fear, rejection, and
resentment. Deer (1972:496) also pointed out that interpersonal conflict is
common to any organization. According to him, ''This type of conflict arises
because of different orientations, power struggles, role competition and other
events that involve two or more persons''.
2.3.4 Intragroup Conflict and its Sources
Intragroup conflict refers to disagreements of differences among the members of
a group or its subgroups regarding the goals, functions, or activities of the group
(Rahim and Bonoma, 1979:1332). Members of the same group (department, or
two or more subgroups within a group) develop conflict either substantive or
affective one, based on intellectual disagreement, or on emotional responses to a
situation (Gordon, 1987:475-476).
There are multiple factors which affect intragroup conflict. Among the major
factors, leadership style is to be the primary source of this conflict. Group
composition and size, Group cohesiveness and group think, and external threats
and their outcomes are also the sources of intragroup conflict (Fader, 1976:315317).
2.3.5 Intergroup Conflict and its Sources
30
Intergroup conflict refers to differences and clashes between groups,
departments, or divisions within an organization (Hellriegel and Slocum 1982:
662). According to these writers, the causes of intergroup conflicts are: 1) task
interdependency; 2) task dependencies; 3) inconsistent performance criteria and
rewards; 4) intergroup differences; and 5) problems in sharing scarce common
resources.
Ivancevich and Matteson (1990:307) suggested that there are causes of inter
group conflict. These are: 1)Interdependence (pooled, sequential and reciprocal)
2) Difference in goals, and 3)Difference in perceptions. Similarly, Organ and
Bateman (1991:505) indicated three major factors that contribute to intergroup
conflicts in organizations. First, the need for joint decision making creates
potential for conflict. This refers to the dependence and interdependence over
and between groups dictated by the systems nature of organizations. Second; the
difference in goals:- multiple goals exist within the same organization. This is
because different individuals and groups, develop different goals by virtue of
internally inconsistent reward systems, competition for scarce resources, etc.
Organizational goals are so subjective and are open to different interpretations.
These complications give rise to the third factor contributing to integroup
conflict,
difference
departmentalization
in
and
perceptions,
different
which
flows
of
are
also
exacerbated
information
to
by
different
organizational sub units.
Perhaps the most important type of intergroup conflict that takes place within
most business and educational organizations is between the management group
and the trade union. Both groups have well defined roles, objectives and tactics.
Such a conflict is intensified not only by factors in the organization's internal
environment (excessive overtime, unfair treatment etc), but also by factors in the
31
external environment (e.g. the rate of inflation and foriein market competition)
as pointed out by Rashid and Archer (1983:322).
In a similar manner, line and staff members in schools, have different time
horizons, goals, interpersonal orientations, and approaches to problems. Allen in
stoner and Freeman (1989:391-403) asserts that, '' These differences enable line
and staff members to accomplish their respective tasks effectively; but the
differences also increase the potential for conflict between them''. Hence, the
conflict between line and staff members in school organizations are examples of
intergroup conflicts. In general, it is obvious for intergroup conflict to occur
between groups or units in organizations and the managing bodies who head
them. Miner (1985:259) pointed out some of the conditions or causes that raise
intergroup conflicts listed as follows.
1) The presence of individuals who particularly prone to the expression of
aggression or who because of their non conformity, creativity, and the like
tend to elicit aggression in others.
2) The presence of individuals who are experiencing major dissatisfactions
with aspect of their roles in the organization.
3) Interdependence between the work of individuals and groups requiring
that decisions be made jointly.
4) Sharp competition between groups having differing objectives and goals
5) Individuals and groups possessing differing perceptions regarding aspects
of the work situation especially if these perceptions are rooted in strongly
held values
6) Considerable loose-lying power with the result that authority allocations
are not well established and their considerable ambiguity regarding roles.
32
At last, but not least, Kinard (1988:309) summarized that there are four primary
sources of intergroup conflict. These are: 1) Limited resources; 2)
Communication problems; 3) Conflicting interests; and 4) Over lapping tasks.
2.4 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
2.4.1 Managing conflict in general
The first thing mangers must consider in conflict situation is whether the conflict
is of potential benefit to the organization or not. According to Owens
(1998:230), frequent and powerful conflict can have a devastating effect on the
behavior of people in organizations. Such conflict results in physical and
psychological withdrawal and is a widely occurring phenomenon in schools that
is often written off as laziness on the part of teachers who have been spoiled by
''soft'' administrative practices.
Effective management of conflict can lead to outcomes that are productive and
enhance the health of the organization. Ineffective management of conflict, on
the other hand can and frequently does- create a climate that exacerbates the
situation and is likely to develop a downward spiral of mounting frustration,
deteriorating organizational climate, and increasing destructiveness as again
33
suggested by Owens (1998:230). According to him, participative leadership
helps people in an organization have good ideas and quality information for
making better decisions. The confrontation of divergent views often produces
ideas of superior quality. Thus, conflict causes people to seek effective ways of
dealing with it, resulting in improved organizational functioning.
Except in some situations where conflict can lead to competition and creativity,
in most other cases conflict is destructive in nature. Therefore it should be
resolved as soon after it has developed as possible. But it is advisable for
managers to make an effort in preventing it from developing (Chandan,
1994:279). Chandan lends us general ideas as to how we deal with conflicts.
According to Chandan (1994:279-281) there are four guiding principles that are
used for the management of conflicts. 1) Preventing conflict:- According to
Schein in Chandan (1994:279), four preventive measures are taken in the
management of conflict. These are: a) Goal structure:- Goals should be clearly defined and the role and contribution
of each unit and the individual in these units towards the organizational goal
must be clearly identified.
b) Reward system:- fair compensation system must be there inorder not to create
individual competition or conflict within units of the organization.
c) Trust and communication:- The greater the trust among members of unit, the
more honest and open the communication among them would be. Individuals
and units should be encouraged to communicate openly with each other so that
they can all understand each other's problems and help each other when
necessary.
34
d) Coordination:- properly coordinated activities reduce conflict.
2) Resolving Behavioral Conflict: - Here, five primary strategies for dealing
with and reducing the impact of behavioral conflict are identified. These are
a) Ignoring the quarrel:- In certain situations, it may be advisable for managers
to play a passive role and avoid it all together. The parties involved in the
conflict may themselves prefer to avoid conflict.
b) Smoothing:- This simply means covering up the conflict by
appealing for
the need for unity rather than addressing the issue of conflict itself.
c) Compromising:- In dealing with compromising each party gives up something
and also gains some thing. This technique of conflict resolution is very common
in negotiations between the labour unions and management bodies.
d) Forcing:- This is the technique of domination where the dominator has the
power and authority to enforce his own views over the opposing confecting
party. This technique is effective in situations, such as firing a trouble-maker
and conflict creating managers by the president of the company.
e) Problem solving:- This technique involves'' confronting the conflict'' in order
to seek the best solution to the problem. This approach objectively assumes that
in all organizations, no matter how well they are managed, there will be
differences of opinions which must be resolved, through discussions and respect
for differing view points. In general, this technique is very useful in resolving
conflicts arising out of semantic misunderstandings. It is not so effective in
resolving non-communicative types of conflicts such as those that are based on
35
differing value systems, where it may even intensify differences and
disagreements.
3) Resolving structural based conflicts:This can be solved or prevented by redesigning organizational structure and
work -flow. A general strategy would be to move towards as much
decentralization as possible so that most of the disputes can be settled at the
lower levels in the organization.
4) Stimulating conflict:- It is pointed out earlier that under certain circumstances
conflict is necessary and desirable inorder to create changes and challenges
within the organization. In such situations, management would adopt a policy of
conflict stimulation so that it encourages change and innovation. Some of the
factors that stimulate or create conflict are: Too much satisfaction with the status
quo, low rate of employee turnover, shortage of new ideas, strong resistance to
change, friendly relations taking precedence over organizational goals and
excessive efforts at avoiding conflict. Robbins in Chandan (1994:283) suggested
some specific techniques for inducing conflict written as follows:
a) Appoint managers who support change. Some highly authoritative managers
are very conservative in their outlook and tend to suppress opposing view
points. Accordingly, change-oriented managers should be selected and placed in
such positions which encourage innovation and change from the status quo.
b) Encourage competition:- competition, if managed properly can enhance
conflict which would be beneficial to the organization- such competition
be created by giving incentives to performance, recognition of efforts,
bonuses
for higher performance and status enhancement.
c) Maniplate scarcity:- this would cause conflict and make the individuals
and groups do their best inorder to fully utilize such resources.
36
can
d) Play on status difference:- sometimes, ignoring the senior staff members
and giving visible responsibilities to junior members can cause a conflict
requiring senior members to work harder to prove that they are better than
the junior staff members.
Having dealt with the general approaches for managing conflicts, an attempt will
be made to treat the types of conflict and their management techniques one by
one.
2.4.1.1 Managing Intrapersonal Conflict
Intrapersonal conflict is the conflict within an individual. Unless it is carefully
handled, it can cause a person frustrations, tension and anxiety (Rashid and
Archer, 1983:312). Its management involves matching the individual goals and
role expectations with the needs of the tasks and with the role demand inorder to
optimize the goal of the individual and the organization as well (Rahim,
1986:46).
Individual conflict can sometimes be revolved by reassessment and new ranking
of the values in the choice situations. This results either because of a change in
the situation or because of the development of new insight or understanding on
the part of managers (Culberston, et-al, 1960:482)
2.4. 1. 2 Managing Interpersonal Conflict
Different strategies may be used to handle Interpersonal conflict. Blake and
Mounton in Rahim and Bonoma (1979:1326) presented five styles for managing
this type of conflict. These are: avoiding, accommodating, competing,
37
compromising and collaborating. Other writer such as filley in Rashid and
Archer (1983:322) listed three possible strategies that are used to manage
interpersonal conflicts.
1) Win-lose strategy:- In this approach only one person wins while the other
person suffers from the humiliation of losing. In such a situation there is little
room for compromise. But there are cases where personal dominance by the
boss, rule by majority, and or rule by powerful minority use this strategy for the
proper management of this type of conflict.
2) Lose- lose strategy: - This is a ''compromising'' technique in which every one
gains a little but lose a lot-by compromising standards, qualities, and other
important values; but resolving the conflict to a certain extent.3) The win-win
strategy:- This states that ''every body can win and nobody loses.'' This involves
realistic, goal oriented, problem-solving efforts leading to discussions by
consensus. In this case, people tend to be problem-centered than ego-centered.
They carry out open and honest transactions with eachother, focussing on goals
and using an integrative strategy so that both parties stand to gain.
Interpersonal styles of handling conflicts may be used when the school leaders,
individuals, or groups enter conflict or when they are coming in conflict
situation. Inorder to seek solution for this type of conflict, Rahim (1985:83-85)
suggested five styles. These are:
1) Integrating:- This involves openness, exchange of information, and
examination of differences to reach a solution acceptable to both parties. It
involves problem solving which may lead to creative solutions (Rahim and
Bonoma, 1979:1327).
2) Obliging:- It is also called smoothing, which refers to the tendency to
minimize or suppress the open recognition of real or perceived differences in
conflict situations while emphasizing common interest (Hellriegel and slocum,
38
1982:658). In this case, the leader acts as though the conflict will pass with time
and appears to the need for cooperation. This style is effective on a short-term
basis.
3) Dominating:- This is similar to win lose orientation or forcing behavior to
win one's position (Rahim, 1985:84). Hellriegel and Slocum (1982:659) pointed
out that, the successful use of dominating style results in outcomes that are
satisfactory to only one of the parties. According to him this style is applied
when: a) there are extreme emergencies and quick action is necessary;
b)unpopular course of action must be taken for long term organizational
effectiveness and survival; and c)when others are trying to take advantage of
some one, and the person needs to take quick action for self protection.
4) Avoiding:- This is the tendency to with draw from or remain
neutral in
conflict situations. 5) Compromising:- refers to both parties give up something
to make a mutually acceptable decision (Rahim and Bonoma, 1979:1327). This
is a give- and take approach involving moderate concern for both self and others
(Krietner and kinicki, 1992:382) 6) Problem-solving:- This is a mechanism in
which the cases are looked into and eliminated through corrective action.
Scientific approach to problem solving and its steps are elaborated by UNESCO
(1980:23) as follows: Recognize that the problem exists; Collect facts
(information) pertaining to it; Analyze and classify information; Establish one or
more hypothetic solutions; Select each one and assess feasibility; Select the
optimal solution and try it; and Check and make adjustment if necessary.
Thus, conflict-resolution is an important aspect of problem- solving. But, Rahim
and Bonoma (1979:1328) suggested that there is no best style for handling
conflict-it all depends on the situation.
2.4.1.3 Managing Intragroup Conflicts
39
It is suggested that team building is the prominent method among others to
manage intragroup conflict. It helps the group members to learn the integrative
or collaborative styles of behavior in handling disagreements (Rahim and
Bonoma, 1979:1325). It was also noted that negotiation is another technique that
can be effectively used together with team building (Harrison in Rahim and
Bonoma, 1979:1325).
Intragroup conflict can be reduced by transferring one or more of the conflicting
members to other units. This type of conflict may also be reduced by making a
group more cohesive and homogeneous through interventions for organizational
development. To do so, effective managers of relevant qualification are needed.
The head of the department or the manager can also affect the amount of conflict
by altering the reward system, rules, procedures, and goals (Rahim and
Bonoma,) 1979:1336).
2.4.1.4 Managing Intergroup Conflicts
The most effective ways of managing intergroup conflicts are collaboration and
compromise. Conflict can also be minimized by the changes in the
organization's reward system, better personnel selection and other effective
training programs (Hellriegel and Slocwm, 1982:668). According to them
variety of other mechanisms such as interventions by superiors, use of
superordinate goals (shared goals of groups that can be achieved only through
cooperation), separate integrating groups, and standardized practices are used to
manage intergroup conflicts. Ivancevich and Matteson (1990:308) listed seven
styles of managing intergroup conflict through resolution. These are: 1) problem
solving (face to face discussion), 2) superordinate goals, 3) expansion of
40
resources; 4) avoidance, 5) forcing, 6) smoothing (de-emphasizing their
difference), and 7) compromise (no distinct winner or loser). These writers also
pointed out for strategies for managing intergroup conflicts through stimulation.
These are: 1) Communication or information, 2)Bringing outside (new)
individuals into the group, 3) Altering the organization's structure, and 4)
Stimulating competition. There are also other tactics used to resolve intergroup
conflicts. These
are: identifying subordinate goals, interchanging group
members, identifying a common enemy (external threats), reward cooperation,
and involve the third party as a facilitator (Hunt, 1992:104).
2.4.2 The Role of Educational leaders in the Management of Conflicts
Leadership, as Hunt (1979:90) defines, ''... is a process which involves, the
leader, the subordinates, and the situation''. Accordingly, three variables were
identified i.e., 1) the personality of the leader; 2) the personalities of the
subordinates; and 3) the characteristics of the situation (tasks, structure,
pressures etc.)
Leadership is the heart and soul of conflict management. Because leading
involves influencing others (such as conflicting parties) inorder to accomplish
conflict resolution. To be effective leaders, educational managers need to
understand individual and group behavior, causes of conflicts, styles of handling
conflicts and leadership styles. Educational managers must develop relationships
that ensure adequate communication with their subordinates (teachers).
According to Kinard (1988:9), leading includes managing personal conflict,
helping employees deal with changing conditions, and in some cases,
disciplining employees.
41
The managerial or perceptual skills of a leader depends on his/ her capacity to
read the requirements of the situation, especially the requirements of the task
and his/her subordinates, and his/her flexibility in reacting that situation (Hunt,
1979:103). Hence, the modern approach of educational leaders relies not so
much in what they are able to do, but in what they are able to stimulate and help
others to do.
A group of experts of the Addis Ababa education Bureau attempted to study the
attitude of teachers toward their educational leaders, and other relevant issues.
Questionnaire was distributed to 520 teachers to collect information and it was
found out that the majority of the teachers commented that most of the
educational leaders are assigned to different positions without having the
necessary qualification and work experience. Furthermore, it was said that the
prevailing situation of educational leadership in Addis Ababa is not in a position
to a) manage differences, b) solve professional problems of teachers, c) motivate
teachers and d) accomplish its jobs effectively and efficiently (A.A Edu. Bureau,
2001:51).
Educational managers are relatively consistent in the way that they try to
influence other's behavior. A manager who dominates his/her subordinates in
one situation is not likely to use a high degree of consideration and participation
in another. The behavior patterns of a leader called leadership style, can be
classified as autocratic, participative and laissez -faire (Kinard, 1988:326)
In general, the above cited leadership behaviors of educational managers may
one way or the other contribute a great significance to the effective
implementation of conflict management in school settings.
42
Finally, it is hoped that most of the research reviewed in this chapter provide a
theoretical framework for identifying the nature of conflict (views), the types of
conflicts, the sources of conflicts, techniques of resolving conflicts and the
leadership roles of educational managers to manage conflicts in school
organizations. Thus, on the basis of these theoretical considerations, further
investigations will be carried out to answer the basic questions of the study.
CHAPTER III
3. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA
43
This chapter deals with the analysis and interpretation of the data pertaining to
the background information of the sample population and their responses to the
items that are set in the instruments.
3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLE POPULATION
The importance of this part is to provide some basic background information
about the target population with the assumption that it might have some kind of
relationship with the issue to be assessed.
The necessary data was gathered through questionaire and interviews. The
questionaire was distributed to secondary school teachers, school principals,
zonal and regional educational managers Interview was also employed with the
high level managers of the Education Bureau in Addis Ababa administrative
region. Three hundred twenty nine questionnaires were distributed and the total
questionnaire returned were 310 out of which 245 were teachers and the 65 were
educational managers The characteristics (sex, age, service year, qualification
and field of study) of the respondents are classified, analyzed and interpreted as
follows.
Table 1 characteristic of Respondents
No
Item
Teachers
No
%
44
RESPONSES
Managers
No
%
Interviewees
No
%
1
2
sex
male
female
sum
Age
Below 30
218
27
245
89
11
100
57
8
65
87.6
12.4
100
37
15
-
-
-
-
64
26
11
17
1
10
110
45
44
68
6
60
34
14
10
15
3
30
245
100
65
100
10
100
below 10
51
21
1
1.5
-
-
11-20
72
29
15
23.1
1
10
above 20
122
50
49
75
9
90
sum
245
100
65
100
10
100
Diploma
58
23.7
6
9
-
-
Bachelor
183
74.7
52
80
5
50
Masters
4
1.6
7
11
5
50
245
100
65
100
10
100
-
-
24
37.0
1
10
Other subjects
41
630
9
90
Sum
65
100
10
100
31-40
41-50
above50
sum
9
1
10
90
10
100
service year
4
Qualification
Sum
5
Filed of study
Educational management
Concerning the sex of the respondents, the majority, i.e. 218 (89%) of the
teachers and 57 (87.6%) of the educational managers are males. The rest 27
(11%) of the teachers and 8 (12.4%) of the educational managers are females.
Hence, according to the information gathered many of the respondents are
males. From the above data, one can realize that the participation of women as
45
educational managers is minimal. According to the views expressed by some
researchers like Anderson (1968:109) sex appears to be related to the degree of
authority conflict experienced.
Item 2 in the table depicts the age of the respondents. As can be seen from the
table, 37(15%) of the teachers were below the age of 30, where as 208 (85%) of
them and all (100%) of the educational managers were in the age interval 31 to
50 years. From this one can say that the majority of the respondents were old
enough to deal with possible conflicts.
Regarding the service year of respondents, we could see that 51 (21%) of the
teachers and only one (1.5%) of the educational managers had a service year
below 10 while the majority, that is 194 (79%) of the teachers and 64 (98.5%) of
the educational managers had a service year above 11. This shows us that the
majority of the respondents have rich work experience to deal with the
conflicting situations.
Another item in the same table was concerned with qualification of respondents.
As can be seen from the table, 58 (23.7%) of the teachers and 6 (9%) of the
educational managers were diploma holders, where as 187
( 76.3%) of the teachers and 59 (91%) of the educational managers had their
first and second degrees. From this one can deduce that the majority of the
respondents were well qualified and could understand the conflicting situations
and deal with them.
The last item in table 1 deals with the training condition of respondents
particularity the educational managers. It was found that majority of them ie, 41
(63%) of the managers were graduates of different subjects other than
46
management of education. The rest i.e, 24 (37.%) were ofcorse graduates of
educational management. This tells us that most educational managers are
assigned with out having the necessary managerial skills. Thus, it is possible to
say that most educational managers assigned at present in various levels of the
education bureau lack the basic knowledge of administration that enables them
to easily manage conflicts.
Table 1 also consists of the demographic information of the interviewees (higher
educational managers at regional level). It is surprising that there was only one
female interviewee from among the higher educational officers. Regarding their
age, only one (10%) of the interviewees was between the ages 31-40. The
majority of the interviewees was above the age of forty. This indicates that
almost all of them (100%) are university graduates with a bachlor's degree and
above. Hence, it is possible to say that almost all of the interviewees are old
enough and possess a reasonable qualification.
It is important to note only one (10%) of the interviewees is graduate of
educational administration. The rest (90%) of the interviews are graduates of
different subjects other than management in education. This situation does not
enable higher educational leaders to devise mechanisms for managing conflicts
as it is stated by Kinard (1988:9) in the literature.
Regarding the service year of the interviewees, only one (10%) of them has
served between years 11 to 20, the others 9 (90%) have a service year above 20.
this rich experience may help them to devise different mechanisms for solving
existing problems.
3.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation
47
As indicated in Chapter One, the main aim of the study was to investigate the
factors that initiate conflict between secondary school teachers and educational
leaders. The study also aimed at examining the strategies employed to handle
conflicts and explore the views on conflict.
This chapter is mainly concerned with the presentation, analysis and
interpretation of the data obtained through questionaire and interview. The data
was gathered from teachers of different status and educational managers at
different levels with the aim of getting a clearer picture of the situation.
Percentage (%) and frequency distribution were used to determine the personal
characteristics of the respondents and analyze the data. The chi-square (x2) was
also applied to test whether or not there is a significant difference between
managers and teachers and the level of significance: α = 0.05
Corresponding to the research questions that the study set out to answer, the data
have been categorized under the following headings.
1. Views of conflict
2. Types of conflict (personal &group) and their sources
3. Common sources of conflict
4. Management of conflict
Thus, the data will be presented and discussed under the headings mentioned
above.
3.2.1Views of conflict
48
Attempts were made to gather information about how teachers and educational
managers generally view the concept of conflict. The issue is discussed as
follows in table2. In table 2, respondents were asked to give their view on the
extent to which conflict affects staff morale. The majority of the teachers i.e,
189 (77.5%) and educational managers i.e 48 ( 75%) seem to agree with the
statement that conflict highly affects the work morale of the staff. The rest
teaches and managers argued that conflict has little or no effect on the morale of
the staff. Although teachers and managers seem to have a common view on the
issue, statistically the X2 test at ∝= 0.05, X2= 6.7 revealed that there is a
significant difference between the two groups of respondents. Thus from the
data obtained, one could say that conflict has something to do with the morale of
the staff in the organization.
Table 2 views of conflict
No
2.1
items
The extent to which conflict
affects staff morale
2.2
Total
The degree of job effectiveness
in the absence of conflict
2.3
Total
The degree conflict creates bad
feeling
Rating scale
Respondent Groups
Teachers
No
189
13
42
244
150
26
69
245
177
11
50
238
High
Moderate
Low
High
Moderate
Low
High
Moderate
Low
Total
49
%
77.5
5.3
17.2
100
61.2
10.6
28.2
100
74.4
4.6
21
100
Managers
No
%
48
75
9
14
7
11
64
100
33
50.8
13
20
19
29.2
65
100
55
85.9
4
6.3
5
7.8
64
100
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
The extent conflicting parties are
benefited
Total
the extent conflict can bring a
change
Total
For conflict to occur there should
be change agents in an
organization
Total
Conflict is useful is creating new
ides if properly managed
Total
The existence of conflict is
inevitable
Total
Conflict must be eliminated
Conflict results in better work
climate
High
Moderate
Low
High
Moderate
Low
Agree
Less agree
Disagree
Agree
Less agree
Disagree
Agree
Less agree
Disagree
Agree
Less agree
Disagree
Agree
Less agree
Disagree
Total
75
30.7
29
45.3
52
117
21.3
48
14
21
21.9
32.8
244
76
74
99
249
28
83
131
242
164
63
16
243
69
103
69
241
103
76
64
243
67
88
86
241
100
30.5
29.7
39.8
100
11.6
34.3
54.1
100
67.5
25.9
6.6
100
28.6
42.7
28.7
100
42.4
31.3
26.3
100
27.8
36.5
35.7
100
64
39
10
14
63
15
31
19
65
52
10
3
65
45
12
7
64
13
24
27
64
19
31
15
65
100
61.9
15.9
22.2
100
23.1
47.7
29.2
100
80
15.4
4.6
100
70.3
18.8
10.9
100
20.3
37.5
42.2
100
29.3
47.7
23
100
Question item 2.3 in the same table is concerned with the degree to which
conflict creates bad feeling between the conflicting parties. In this case 117
( 74.4% teachers and 55 (85.9%) educational managers strongly believe that
conflict creates bad feeling among the two conflicting parties. The X2 test at p<
.05, X2 =5.95 shows that there is no statistically significant difference between
the two groups. On the other hand, in item 2.9 of the same table, respondents
never agreed to the idea that '' conflict must be eliminated since it is harmful''. It
is observed that 103 (42.4%) of the teachers and 13 (20.3%) of the manager
agreed that conflict must be eliminated. The rest majority of the teacher and
manager respondents disagree on the issue under consideration. It is statistically
tested that the reaction of the respondents is not the same. Since the value of the
X2 in this question item is calculated to be 11.42, which is greater than the table
50
value, it is possible to say that there is a significant difference between the two
groups of respondents.
Other question items such as item No.s 2.4, 2.5 and 2.7 are related to the
positive views of conflict. In item 2.4 respondents were asked to give their
opinion on the extent to which conflicting parties are benefit out of conflict.
Accordingly 75 ( 30.7%) of the teachers and 29 (45.3) of the managers
responded that conflicting parties benefit out of a conflict. The other great
majority of the respondents strongly argued that conflict gives some benefit to
conflicting parties The X2 test at p< 0,05, X2 = 5.81 revealed that there is no
statistically significant difference between the two groups of respondents. On
the other hand question item 2.5 asks the respondents to give their opinion on
the contribution of conflict in bringing about a change in an organization. Here,
76 (30.5%) of the teachers and 39 (61.9%) of the educational managers
indicated that conflict is useful to bring about a change, Interestingly enough,
one can observe that teachers and managers differ in their opinion about conflict
particularly its role to bring about a change. Teachers tend to resist to accept the
usefulness of conflict in bringing about a change. The calculated X2 =21.27, at ∝
= 0.05 also strongly reveals that there is a significant difference between the
teachers and managers. In an attempt to find a feedback from respondents
regarding question item 2.7, it was observed that the majority of teachers i.e,
164 (67.5%) and 52 (80%) of the managers agreed that conflict is useful in
creating new ideas if it is properly managed. Statistically, the value of the
calculated chi- square (X2=3.87) clearly indicated that there is no a significant
difference between the two groups of respondents.
Another item (2.8) is concerned with the existence of conflict in an
organization. Few teachers i.e, 69(28.6%) and majority of the educational
51
managers i.e, 45 (70.3) argued that the existence of conflict in an organization is
inevitable.
The majority of the teachers i.e, 172 (71.4%) fail to agree on the inevitability of
conflict to exist in an organization. The calculated chi-square value was found to
be (X2=37.55), which suggests that there is a significant difference between the
two group of respondents.
From the above findings with regard to the views of conflict, one can deduce
that conflict can affect the working morale of the staff and even create a bad
feeling among conflicting partices unless it is properly managed. If it is properly
managed it can even create new ideas and bring about a change in an
organization. It is important to note that teachers are not in a position to accept
the existence of conflict and its role to make a change but on the contrary,
educational managers agreed that the existence of conflict in an organization or
in a place where people work together is inevitable. They also believe that
conflict can bring a change in an organization. This was again substantiated by
the interviewee's responses.
It is clear from the data that both groups of respondents (teachers and managers)
seem to agree with the idea that conflict is harmful for two parties that are in
conflict. Authorities such as Williams (1978:139) and Hellriegel & Slocum
(1982:637) also agree that intense conflict can affect the health of involved
parties. On the other hand, respondents agree that conflict can help to create new
ideas if it is properly handled. Therefore, it can be said that conflict is useful for
an individual and the organization as whole if it is properly managed. Another
interesting phenomena observed under this heading is that teachers and
managers differed on the role of conflict to bring about a change. Managers
52
believed that conflict is a means of causing changes, while teacher were
reluctant to accept this idea. It seems that teachers are afraid of being victim out
of conflicting situations. It also shows that teachers have not yet started enjoying
differences. The data from the interviewees (Heads of the Bureau) substantiated
this idea. However, many writers in the litrature believe that conflict is generally
useful to make changes (See Chapter Two).
Educational leaders by virtue of their work experience in management are
conscious about the role of conflict in bringing about needed changes. They also
believe that it is a must for conflicts to exist in organizations where people of
differing views, interests, values, beliefs etc, work together. Thus, one can see a
gap between teachers & managers in their attitude on conflict. The teachers'
attitude towards conflict that any challenge is seen only as destructive is
consistent to the observed facts raised at the beginning.
3.2.2 Intrapersonal conflict and its sources
Respondents were asked to give comments on
intrapersonal conflict.
information was gathered on whether or not conflict within an individual person
could produce conflict in the organization. Table 3 presents data
on
intrapersonal conflict and its sources.
The first item in the table focusses on work environment. Respondents were
asked whether or not they believed there is a conducive work environment in
schools. Majority of the teachers i.e. 237 (96.6%) and all managers agreed that
there is no a workable environment with adequate facility in school settings.
Statistically, it was found that ( X2 = 2.02) there was a common agreement
between managers and teachers.
53
With respect to the 2nd item in the table, respondents were asked whether or not
there is a match between individual and organizational goals. In this regard, the
majority of the teachers and educational managers i.e., 133 (54.5%) and 50
(77%) respectively said that the mismatch between personal and organizational
goals sometimes affects intrapersonal conflict. The calculated value of the chisquare (X2=14.6) also suggests that there is a significant difference between the
two groups of respondents.
Table 3 intrapersonal conflict and their sources
No
Items
3.1.1
Bad work environment
3.1.2
Total
Mismatch between individual
and organizational goal
3.1.3
Total
Low standard of living
(low salary)
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
Total
Overload of work
Total
Lack required ability for a
particular job
Total
Poor performance evaluation
Respondent Groups
Rate of
occurrence
Teachers
No
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
54
78
159
8
245
51
133
60
244
111
113
17
241
93
141
4
238
36
176
26
238
135
106
4
%
31.8
46.8
3.4
100
21
54.5
24.5
100
46.1
46.7
7.2
100
39.1
59.2
1.7
100
15.1
74
10.9
100
55.1
43.3
1.6
Managers
No
%
27
38
0
65
12
50
3
65
19
45
0
64
15
45
4
64
15
46
4
65
22
43
0
41.5
58.5
0
100
18.5
77
4.5
100
30
70
0
100
23.4
70.3
6.3
100
23.1
70.8
6.1
100
33.8
66.2
0
3.1.7
3.1.8
3.1.9
Total
lack of understanding of the
new educational and training
policy
Total
Mismatch between
competency and responsibility
for a particular position
Total
Disagreement with bosses
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Total
245
64
137
33
234
68
121
53
242
75
144
22
241
100
27.4
58.5
14.1
100
28.1
50
29.9
100
31.1
59.6
9.3
100
65
14
45
5
64
24
37
4
65
13
44
8
65
100
21.9
70.3
7.8
100
36.9
56.9
6.2
100
20
67.7
12.3
100
Regarding item 3.1.3 respondents replied that low standard of living causes
intrapersonal conflict. More specifically, 11 (46.1%) and 113(46.7) of the
teachers said economic factor affect intrapersonal conflict to a large and medium
extent respectively, whereas 19 (30%) and 45 (70%) educational managers
answered its rate of occurrence as ''always'' and ''sometimes'' respectively. From
this we can deduce that a large number of teachers believed that low standard of
living affect the intrapersonal conflict to a great extent than the managers. This
is consistent with the observed problem of teachers in Addis Ababa. Hence, the
competitive market situation may lead to the creation of intrapersonal conflict.
Item 3.14 in the same table focusses on the workload problems. In this case the
majority of the teachers i.e, 141 (59.2%) and 45 (70.3%) of the managers feet
that there is a considerable problem of workload. Other respondents, 93 (39.1%)
of the teachers and 15 (23.4%) of the educational managers strongly agree that
teachers are overloaded in their work. An effort was made to check whether the
two groups of respondents have a common agreement in their opinion towards
the problem of high workload by applying statistical methods. It was found that
the X2 test at p<0.05, X2=8.3 revealed that there is a significant difference
between teachers and managers.
55
Another question item was forwarded to find out whether or not the mismatch
between what is planned and what is actually performed can be a cause of
intrapersonal conflict. In this regard, majority of teachers, 176 (74%) and
managers, 46 (70.8%) seem to agree that this factor sometimes affects
intrapersonal conflict.
The next item 3.1.6 asked whether poor performance evaluation caused
intrapersonal conflict. Here, we can see a difference in opinion between teachers
and managers. Majority of the teachers i.e., 135 (55.1%) believed that there is a
poor evaluation system. But, it seems that educational managers were reluctant
to accept this situation as only 22 (33.8%) of them agreed that there is a poor
performance evaluation system in schools. The Majority of the educational
managers i.e. 43 (66.2%) reported that this kind of situation occurs sometimes in
school settings. The difference in opinion between the teachers and managers
was confirmed by applying statistics. It was found out that the chi-square test at
p<0.05 is X2= 10.4 and this revealed that there is a significant difference
between the two groups of respondents.
The reason why they are different in opinion seems that teachers always claim
of the poor evaluation system which is irrelevant to the things they do. They also
tend to feel that they are evaluated by people who do not know them well.
Another item in table 3 was concerned with competency versus responsibility
for a particular position. Respondents were asked to give their opinion as to
whether the lack of required ability for particular Job is a cause of intrapersonal
conflict or not. Most of the respondents i.e, 121 (50%) of the teachers and 37
(56.9%) of the managers indicated that this situation occurs sometimes in
schools. Of course, 68 (28.1%) of the teachers and 24 (36.9%) of the educational
56
managers believed that it usually takes place in schools. This item is also
statistically proofed that there is again a significant difference (X2= 8.62)
between the two respondent groups.
The last item in Table 3 focused on how the domination by the bosses or the
feeling of powerlessness affects the intrapersonal conflict in school settings. In
this case, 75 (31.1%) teachers and 13 ( 20%) educational managers agreed that
this factor highly affects the intrapersonal conflict in secondary schools, where
as the majority i.e.144 (59.6%) teachers and 44(67.7%) managers said that
workers are dominated by their bosses i.e. their feeling of powerlessness has an
effect on intrapersonal conflict to a medium extent. The chi-square result
(X2=3.25) indicated that there is no significant difference between teachers and
managers on this issue. Thus, it can be said that this factor considerably affects
the situation.
The above findings, therefore, justify that badwork environment, the mismatch
between personal and organizational goals to some extent, low standard of
living, work load, the dissatisfaction of getting poor performance evaluation
results and the lack of required skill for a particular position seem to be the
causes of intrapersonal conflict in secondary schools.
3.2.3 Interpersonal conflict
As it has been said earlier, interpersonal conflict refers to the conflict between
two or more staff members of the same or different hierarchical levels in the
structure under consideration. This type of conflict could be caused by several
factors.
57
Table 4 presents data on how often the factors raised affect interpersonal
conflict. In an attempt to find out respondents views on certain factors that are
thought to be the causes of interpersonal conflict, teachers and managers were
asked to indicate the frequency with which these factors occurred. The list
identified included factors such as the absence of helping relationship,
ideological and goal differences, age, sex and ethnic differences, power
struggles, and competition for limited resources. Table 4 presents data on these
factors.
With regards to the first factor concerning the absence of cooperation majority
of teachers and managers i.e. 188(77%) and 29 (65.9%) respectively felt that
this factor sometimes leads to interpersonal conflict Statistical test showed that
there is no significant difference between the two groups. Thus, both groups
share the view that the role of this factor in generating interpersonal conflict is a
considerable one.
The next item in Table 4 dealt with the role of ideological and goal differences
in causing interpersonal conflict. Accordingly, 158(65.2%) teachers and 33
(51.6%) managers reported that this factor causes interpersonal conflict to some
extent. A considerable proportion of teachers (27.6%) and, managers (45.3%)
saw this factor as causing this type of conflict more frequently i.e. always. Thus,
the data seem to suggest that difference in goals and ideology may be partly
responsible for the creation of interpersonal conflict that may occur in secondary
schools. However, it seems that more managers perceived a closer link between
ideological and goal differences and interpersonal conflict. It seems, managers
think that teachers suffer from difference of goals and ideology.
58
Table 4 Interpersonal conflict and sources
Respondents Groups
No
3.2.1
Items
Absence of cooperation
between workers
3.2.2
Total
Ideological & goal difference
(personality differences)
3.2.3
Total
Inappropriate implementation
of rules and regulations
3.2.4
Total
Age, sex and ethnic
differences
3.2.5
Total
Authoritative approach of
solving problems
3.2.6
3.2.7
Total
power struggles
Total
Competition for limited
resources
Rate of occurrence
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Total
Teachers
Managers
No
%
No
%
38
188
18
244
67
158
17
242
72
132
36
240
35
128
77
240
63
120
57
240
48
103
87
238
33
131
75
239
15.6
77
7.4
100
27.6
65.2
7.2
100
30
55
15
100
14.6
53.3
32.1
100
26.3
50
23.7
100
20.2
43.3
36.5
100
13.8
54.8
31.4
100
13
29
2
44
29
33
2
64
19
29
15
63
9
34
21
64
21
31
12
64
10
38
16
64
13
38
13
64
29.5
65.9
4.6
100
45.3
51.6
31.1
100
30.2
46
23.8
100
14.1
53.1
32.8
100
32.8
48.4
18.8
100
15.6
59.4
25
100
20.3
59.4
20.3
100
Regarding age, sex and ethnic differences, 35(14.6%) teachers and 9 (14.1%)
managers rated this factor as ''always'' causing interpersonal conflict. 128 (53.3
%) teachers and 34 (53.1) managers saw this factor as ''sometimes'' leading to
conflict. The rest 77(32.1%) teachers and 21 (32.8%) managers saw no link
between the two variables. It appears that the two groups are in complete
agreement with each other on this factor. That is to say, they saw a relatively
weaker link between the characteristics of the individual as defined above and
interpersonal conflict.
59
The next factor concerned about the role of power struggles. With regard to this
item 103(43.3%) and 87 (36.5%) teachers reported that this factor 'sometimes'
and 'never' respectively. Similarly, 38 (59.4%) and 16 (25%) managers saw this
factor as leading to interpersonal conflict ''sometimes'' and ''never''. The data
suggest that both teachers and managers do not consider power struggle as a
cause in generating interpersonal conflict.
The last item in Table 4 focused on how frequently competition for limited
resources caused interpersonal conflict. The data on this factor shows that
131(54.8%) teachers and 38 (59.4%) managers believe that this factor
sometimes leads to interpersonal conflict while 75 (31.4%) teachers and 13
(20.3%) has nothing to do with the creation of interpersonal conflict.
Although the data would seem to suggest that a greater proportion of managers
saw some link between these two variables, a test of statistics failed to show the
significance of this difference. From the data obtained therefore, it is possible to
conclude that competition for limited resources rarely affects interpersonal
conflict. But this is not consistent with the literature. Kinard (1988:309) suggests
that competing for limited capital and manpower resources is one of the primary
sources of interpersonal conflict. Probably, the competition in our case has not
yet started in school rganizations at this point in time.
3.2.4 Intragroup conflict
60
This occurs when there exists disagreement of differences among members of a
group or its sub groups as it is indicated in the literature section. An effort was
made to gather data on certain factors that are thought to cause intra group
conflict. Respondents were asked to answer how frequently these factors occur
to create this type of conflict. One of the factors raised was the unfairness of
period distribution particularly in the night school. Accordingly, 127 (50.1%)
and 72(29.5%) teachers replied as ''sometimes'' and ''never'' respectively. On the
other hand 21 (32.8%) of the managers reported that this factor always leads to
intra group conflict.
Table 5 Intragroup conflict and its sources
No
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
Item
members of the group
are unfairly treated by
their leaders
Total
Unfair period
distribution of Night
session
Total
Divide and rule style of
Group leadership
3.3.4
Total
Group think
3.3.5
Total
Group cohesiveness
3.3.6
Total
Incompetence of the
group
Total
Rate of
occurrence
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Sometimes
Never
Respondent Groups
Teachers
Managers
No
%
No
%
26
10.6
13
20.3
136
55.5
44
68.8
8
34.9
7
10.9
170
100
64
100
45
18.4
21
32.8
127
50.1
38
59.4
72
29.5
5
7.8
244
98
64
100
15
6.2
4
6.3
83
34.3
43
68.3
144
59.5
16
25.4
242
100
63
100
16
6.6
12
18.6
124
51.2
44
68.8
102
42.2
8
12.6
242
100
64
100
18
7.4
8
12.3
133
54.7
47
72.3
92
37.9
10
15.4
243
100
65
100
18
7.4
8
12.9
79
32.6
41
66.1
145
60
13
21
242
100
62
100
The rest 38 (59.4) of the managers also agreed that the factor considerably
affects the situation. From the data obtained although it is a common experience
to hear complaints on the unfairness of night period distribution, one can
61
understand that teachers tend to suggest this factor rarely affects the situation,
while managers think that the factor can lead to intragroup conflict to higher
degree. The Statistical test showed that there is a significant difference between
teachers and managers ( X2 =18.91).
With regard to the tendency of group leaders (department heads in this case) to
lead by using the divide and rule method, respondents were asked to give their
comments on how frequently this factor affects intragroup conflicts. The
majority of the teachers i.e, 44(59.5%) reported that this factor has nothing to do
with intragroup conflict in schools while a great number of managers i.e, 43
(68.3%) believed that this factor affects the intragroup conflict rated as
''sometimes''. Statistical test indicated, there exists a significant difference
between the two respondent groups. Although managers think that this factor
has a considerable effect on the situation, the right people (teachers) who are
members of either of the departments denied that this factor never affects
intragroup conflict. This may be because teachers want to tell us that there is a
sense of oneness between the members of the group. But, literature suggests that
leadership style in a group is the primary source of intragroup conflict.
The teachers' tendency regarding the leadership style is consistent with their
opinion on item 3.3.4 in Table 5. Quite a considerable number of teachers i.e.,
102 (42.2%) again underlined that group think issues are not factors that lead to
intragroup conflict. 44(68.8%) managers, ofcourse, believed that this factor
sometimes leads to conflict. In supporting this idea 124 (51.2%) teachers gave
their comment. Hence, one could say that this factor in one way or another may
have a link with intragroup conflicts. It was statistically supported that there is a
gap between the two respondents on the issue raised.
62
Respondents were also asked to give their comments on how often group
cohesiveness affects intragroup conflict. Accordingly 54.7% and 37.9% of the
teachers replied rating as 'sometimes' and 'never' respectively while 72.3% of
managers agreed that this factor sometimes affects this type of conflict. From
the data, one can deduce that managers are in a position to produce a link
between the two variables, where as teachers believe that this factor rarely
affects intragroup conflict. The chi-square value (X2= 11.9) showed that there is
a significance difference between the group of respondents.
3.2.5 Intergroup conflict
This refers to differences and clashes between groups. Intergroup conflict may
occur between the management group and the trade union, between line and
staff members in school organization, between groups or units in organizations
and the managing bodies etc. This is clearly indicated in Chapter Two of this
paper. The intergroup conflict in this case is the one that occurs between the line
managers and the staff members in school organization, i.e. between educational
managers and teachers which this paper is interested in. The factors that are
thought to be the causes of intergroup conflict were presented to teachers and
managers in the form of question item in Table 6. Respondents were asked how
frequently these factors lead to intergroup conflicts.
Table 6 Intergroup Conflict and its sources
No
3.4.1
3.4.2
Items
Managers never practice
participatory decisions
Total
Unclear policies and
Rate of
occurrence
Always
Sometimes
Never
Always
Respondent Group
Teachers
No
87
126
24
237
64
63
%
36.7
53.2
10.1
100
26.6
Managers
No
21
41
2
64
26
%
32.8
64.1
3.1
100
40.6
guidelines
3.4.3
3.4.4
3.4.5
3.4.6
3.4.7
3.4.8
Total
Due to the difference in
ideology, interest and goal
between the two groups
Total
The problem in the
assignment of educational
managers
Total
solving problems through
table discussion is not
practiced
Total
Failure in knowing and
accomplishing their jobs
properly
Total
Lack of professional
commitment in both groups
Total
Due to the lack of resources
Total
Sometime
Never
Always
Sometime
Never
Always
Sometime
Never
Always
Sometime
Never
Always
Sometime
Never
Always
Sometime
Never
Always
Sometime
Never
149
28
241
50
130
61
241
115
92
33
240
121
96
23
240
39
144
54
237
72
118
48
238
38
133
69
61.8
11.6
100
20.7
53.9
25.4
100
47.9
38.3
13.8
100
50.4
40
9.6
100
16.5
60.8
22.7
100
30.3
49.6
20.1
100
15.8
55.4
28.8
37
1
64
17
40
7
64
25
35
4
64
28
31
4
63
16
39
7
62
26
33
5
64
6
50
8
57.8
1.6
100
26.6
62.5
10.9
100
39.1
54.7
6.2
100
44.4
49.2
6.4
100
25.8
62.9
11.3
100
40.6
51.6
7.8
100
9.4
78.1
12.5
240
100
64
100
The first item in table 6 deals with the failure of managers to practice
participatory decisious. Respondents were asked how frequent this failure causes
intergroup conflict. Accordingly, 87(36.7%) and 126 (53.2%) teachers replied
that this factor occurs 'always' and 'sometimes' respectively. On the other hand,
21 (32.8%) and 41(64.1%) managers commented on this factor as 'always' and
'sometimes' respectively. According to the above data, a large number of both
teachers and managers seem to agree that this factor reasonably affects
intergroup conflict. Statistical test showed that there is no significant difference
between managers and teachers. Therefore, it is possible to say that the lack of
participatory decision is the cause of intergroup conflict. This is consistent with
the problems observed at the beginning i.e, the grievances on the part of teachers
due to the full day work are results of lack of participative decisions. The
involvement of teachers in whatever decisions made by higher bodies makes the
64
implementation of the decision easier. Hence, it is advisable for educational
managers to be aware of the issue and exploit the advantage.
With respect to the second factor, efforts were made to gather data on how
frequent the outdated and unclear policies and guidelines affect intergroup
conflicts Again, the majority of the respondents i.e., 149( 61.8%) teachers and
37 (57.8%) of the managers replied that this factor sometimes affects the
situation. The rest 64 (26.6%) teachers and 26 (40.6%) managers reported that
this factor has a large effect on intergroup conflict. From the above information,
one can understand that backward and vague policies are seen as the causes of
intergroup conflict. The 40.6% of the educational managers indicates that
managers are in problem with the unclear policies than the teachers. This seems
true because it is the managers who translate the policy into action.
Regarding the assignment of educational managers at all levels, 115 (47.9%)
teachers and 25 (39.1%) of the managers suggested that the problem of
assigning educational managers on political basis seems to be the cause of
intergroup conflict to a higher extent. The other respondents i.e., 92 (38.3%)
teachers and 35 (54.7%) managers argued that this factor sometimes affects the
situation. As can be seen from the data above, majority of the teachers tend to
believe that the factor strongly affects intergroup conflict, while managers seem
to believe that it may have an effect to a medium extent. The chi-square value
(X2=6.48) at ∝= 0.05, reveals that there is a significant difference b/n teachers
and managers. The difference in opinion may be because managers are
politically assigned and are placed to a better position, they benefit out of it. But
teachers consider themselves as victims of this bad practice. They tend to think
that they are evaluated or managed by some one who is not professionally and
academically fit simply because he/she is not assigned on merit basis.
65
The next item is concerned with the lack of professional commitment. It was
reported that 30.3% teachers and 40.6% of the managers were in a position to
say that the lack of professional commitment strongly affects the intergroup
conflict where as a considerable number of respondents i.e, 118 (49.6%)teachers
and 33 (51.6%) of the managers reported that this factor affects the situation not
always but sometimes, thus the data showed that the lack of professional
commitment is one of the causes of intergroup conflict. Statistical test however
showed that teachers and managers are not in agreement. Although they have
confirmed that the factor affects the situation, it is surprising that respondents,
specially the teachers tend to deny the reality that no attention is given to the
profession. This may be because most teachers consider themselves as
professionals.
The last item in Table 6 is focussed on how the lack of resources frequently
causes intergroup conflict. The data on this factor shows that 133 (55.4%)
teachers and 50 (78.1%) managers believe that this factor sometimes leads to
intergroup conflict while 69 (28.8%) teachers and 8 (12.5%) managers tend to
think that this factor has nothing to do with the formation of intergroup conflict.
The data seem to suggest that a greater proportion of managers saw some link
between the two variables than the teachers. Test of statistics also confirmed that
there is a significant difference between the managers and teaches. In this
regard, considerable number of teachers i.e., 69 (28.8%) tend to reject the link
between lack of resource and intergroup conflict. This is totally inconsistent
with the views of different writers such as Kinard (1988:309), miner (1985:259)
and Hellriegel and Slocum (1982:662). This may be because a sharp competition
for limited resources is not yet in place in school organizations.
66
One point to mention here is that most of the respondents were reluctant to give
the extreme answers on the rate of occurrence i.e., either 'always' or 'never'.
They tend to prefer the rate of occurrence to be ''sometimes'', assuming that
being at the middle is safe.
3.2.6 Types (levels) of conflict in secondary schools
Respondents were asked through an open- ended question (item 4.1) to give
additional information on the types (levels) of conflict observed in secondary
schools.
Item
No
4.1
1
2
3
4
5
Table 7 Types (level) of conflict in secondary schools
Respondent Group
Types of conflict
Teachers
managers
No
% No
%
Intrapersonal
99
40.4 23
35.4
Interpersonal
148
60.4 35
53.8
Intragroup
77
31.4 22
33.8
Intergroup
160
65.3 36
55.4
Between the individual
61
24.9 17
26.2
and the organization
The possible types of conflict found in the literature were forwarded as an
example out of which respondents can select the types of conflict which they
think are existing in secondary schools. The results are clearly seen in Table7.
According to the data observed in the table, the types of conflict can be put in
order on their degree of magnitude 1) Intergroup conflict,
67
2) Interpersonal conflict, 3) Intrapersonal conflict, 4) Intragroup conflict, and 5)
The conflict between the individual and the organization.
Therefore, intergroup conflicts and interpersonal conflicts are predominantly
found in secondary schools, while the conflict between individual and the
organization is seen to exist in rare cases. Both respondents seem to agree on the
rate of occurrence of the types of conflict mentioned.
3.2.7 Common sources of conflict
In an attempt to get additional information on the common sources of conflict
that exist in secondary schools, an open-ended question item (Item 4.2) was
prepared for both managers and teachers. Again their responses are summarized
in Table 8. Respondents were free to give opinion of any type regarding the
major factors that generate conflict between teachers and educational managers.
It was the researcher's duty to establish standard to the different factors raised by
the respondents.
Table 8 common sources of conflict in sec. schools
Respondent Group
Item
No
1
4.2
2
3
4
5
6
Conflict generating
factors
Bad work environment
Communication
problems
Unfairness due to
ideological and ethnic
differences on the part of
managers
outdated policies and
guidelines
Problems in
implementing teachers
career structure
The lack of professional
commitment
Teachers
No
%
78
31.8
Managers
No
%
31
47.7
120
48.9
45
69.2
70
28.6
24
36.9
34
52.3
116
47.3
67
27.3
21
32.3
60
24.5
24
36.9
68
7
8
9
Due to incapable
educational managers
Because decisions are
made with out the participation of workers
(teachers)
Teachers are resistant to
change
71
28.9
22
36.8
43
17.6
-
-
-
56
86.2
Finally, nine factors were identified that are assumed to satisfy all the responses.
Out of the nine factors, only seven were commonly responded by both managers
and teachers, while the rest two factors were separately answered by either of
the two respondents.
A quick look at the table can help to put the factors in order of their degree of
magnitude. Accordingly, the problems were identified as follows:
1.Communication problems,
2.Outdated rules and guidelines,
3.Bad work environment,
4.The incapability of educational managers to deal with conflicts,
5.Unfairness due to ideological and ethnic differences,
6.The problem of Teachers' career structure,
7.The lack of professional commitment (every body running for
his/her own benefit),
8.The lack of participatory decisions,
9.Teachers' resistance to change.
69
As you can see from Table 8, The last two factors, (numbers 8 and 9) were not
responded commonly. Managers never reacted to the 8th factor believing that
there is no problem in participating the subordinates on the decisions made.
However, a few teachers i.e. 43 (17.6%) reported that managers do not volunteer
to practice participative decisions. The reservation made by managers seems due
to the fact that they probably wanted to cover their weaknesses.
Teachers also preferred not to comment on the last factor which says teachers'
resistance to change. In here, great majority of the managers i.e. 56 (86.2%)
reported that the problem of teachers to resist any kind of change is the primary
source of conflict in secondary schools.
Nevertheless, both respondents tend to agree that the factors which most
frequently appear in schools are factors such as communication problems,
outdated rules and guidelines, bad work environment etc.
The way managers communicate with teachers, democratic handling, treatment
and all the approaches contribute to the creation of communication problems.
The backward and unclear policies and guidelines and their improper
implementations are also found to be the primary sources of conflict in school
settings.
The bad work environment, the lack of the necessary facilities is also another
source of conflict. The other factors included in table 9 have also in one way or
another a considerable effect on the creation of conflicts.
3.2.8 Conflict management
70
Effective management of conflict can lead to outcomes that are productive and
enhances the health of the organization. Ineffective management of conflict, on
the other hand, can and frequently create frustration, deteriorating organizational
climate and finally increase destructiveness.
Table 9 Conflict management --- filled by teachers only
No
Items
Rate of occurrence
Respondents
Teachers
5.1.1
The tendency to accept
opinions from
subordinates
5.1.2
Total
Their tendency to take
corrective measures
5.1.3
Total practice
The practice of participative
decisions
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.1.6
Total
Their altitude of assigning
educational leaders on merit
bases
Total
their tendency to apply only
bureaucratic rules to resolve
conflicts
Total
Their tendency to accept that
conflict can bring a change
High
Moderate
Low
Never
High
Moderate
Low
Never
High
Moderate
Low
Never
High
Moderate
Low
Never
High
Moderate
Low
Never
High
Moderate
Low
71
No
%
35
109
76
16
236
25
103
87
21
236
50
96
72
16
234
55
70
79
30
234
75
98
41
16
230
25
87
93
14.8
46.2
32.2
6.8
100
10.6
43.4
36.9
8.9
100
21.4
41
30.8
6.8
100
23.5
29.9
33.8
12.8
100
32.6
42.6
17.8
7
100
10.9
38
40.6
Never
5.1.7
Total
Their ability to use different
conflict resolution methods
5.1.8
Total
The degree of being change
agents
5.1.9
Total
Their willingness to live with
conflicts
24
229
25
82
110
13
230
34
84
95
High
Moderate
Low
Never
High
Moderate
Low
10.5
100
10.9
35.7
47.8
5.6
100
14.6
36.1
40.8
Never
20
85
High
Moderate
Low
Never
233
35
80
83
28
226
100
15.5
35.4
36.7
12.4
100
Total
This was suggested by different writers mentioned in the litrature section.
Question items were prepared only for teachers to give their opinion on how
effective the educational managers (at all levels) in Addis Ababa education
bureau are to manage conflicts and solve educational problems.
Question items such as managers readines a) to accept opinions from
subordinates, b) to take corrective measures on time, c) to practice participatory
decisions, d) to apply problem solving technique, e) to accept the usefulness of
conflict to make a change, and f) their willingness to live with conflict were
prepared to gather data from the respondents (teachers). Table 10 presents data
on these question items.
The first item had a look at managers' readiness to accept opinions from
subordinates. Teachers were asked to give comments on the extent to which
managers apply this practice. Accordingly, 109(46.2%) and 76 (32.2%) teachers
replied that the degree of its application to be moderate and low respectively.
From this data, one could say that educational managers are still far behind to
accept this idea. Besides, the data in item 5.1.2 of the same table also showed
72
that the tendency of managers to take corrective measures on time was found to
be moderate and low as well.
Respondents were also asked to give their opinion on the attitude of educational
managers towards the way they are assigned. Again 70 (30%) and 79 (33.8%) of
the teachers rated as moderate and low respectively. This shows that managers'
tendency on the need to be assigned on merit basis was found to be minimal. In
fact, 12.8% of the teachers witnessed that managers never like to be assigned on
the basis of competition.
Another question item focused on the extent to which managers only apply
bureaucratic rules to solve conflicts. Majority of the teachers i.e. 38% and 40.6%
replied as moderate and low respectively. This data again showed that
educational managers still tend to apply bureaucratic rules or disciplinary
measures only to resolve conflicts. They don't attempt to seek for better conflict
resolution methods. This may be because they are not aware of the other
different techniques for resolving conflicts. This finding is consistent with item
5.1.7. Here, the ability of managers to apply different conflict resolution
mechanisms was found to be low. Majority of the teachers i.e. 110 (47.8%) and
82 (35.7%) said that the degree of application to be low and medium
respectively.
The extent to which managers practiced participative decisions was also found
to be low. The data showed that 41% and 30.8% of the teachers agreed that
managers in these days apply participatory decisions in a medium and lower
extent respectively, therefore, work has to be done to change the mind of
educational managers that they have to exercise democratic decisions. Owens
73
(1998:230) suggested that participative leaderships helps people in organization
have good ideas and quality information.
With respect to the degree of being change agents on the part of educational
managers, respondents (teachers) were asked to give their opinion. As the result,
95 (40.8%) teachers reported that the degree of application of this practice is
low. Other 84 (36.1%) teachers said, it is applied to a medium extent. Therefore
unless educational managers act like change agents, it would be very difficult to
make the necessary changes in the organization. Infact, managers of educational
institutions are expected to be initiators of conflict inorder to bring and make
changes.
In an attempt to know the willingness of educational managers to live with
conflict respondents were asked to what extent this willingness is practiced by
managers. Accordingly, 35.4% and 36.7% of the teachers responded the rate of
its application to be moderate and low respectively. This data reveals that
managers tend to resist to live with conflicts. They seem to be afraid of
conflicting situations. According to them, maintaining the status quo is more
preferable to be on the safe side.
In general, the ability of managers to manage conflicts and their overall
competency to do other managerial activities was found to be very poor.
Therefore, being the situation like this as witnessed by respondent teachers,
proper management of conflict in secondary schools would be unthinkable.
Another point to be mentioned is that the readiness of educational managers to
become change agents was also found to be very low, therefore, managers are
not in a position to introduce new ways of doing things. One question item in
Table 2, which focused on the role of conflict to bring a change was forwarded
74
to both managers and teachers. Managers in that case argued that conflict is
useful to make changes. But the responses provided by teachers under Table 9
regarding the readiness of managers to accept the idea that conflict brings
needed change contradicts with the previous one. The contradiction or the
difference in opinion on the same issue can be a good indication that there is a
gap in attitude between the two groups.
With regards to the mechanisms of resolving conflict, an open-ended
questionaire (Item 4.3) was prepared to gather information from teachers as well
as managers. The possible conflict management techniques mentioned in the
litrature were given as examples, out of which respondents can easily select the
ones which they think are frequently practiced in secondary schools- Of course,
respondents were not forced to stick only to the examples given. They were free
to give their own opinion. Having said this, let us analyze the data shown in
table 10. Under this table respondents ( both teachers and managers) were asked
to give their opinion on the methods of resolving conflict that are frequently
applied in school settings.
Item
No
4.3
1
2
3
4
5
Table 10 conflict management strategies
Respondent Group
Conflict management
Teachers
Managers
strategies
No
%
No
%
Forcing
152
62
30
46.2
Compromising
132
53.9
41
63.1
Avoiding
100
40.8
25
38.5
Preventing
53
21.6
23
35.4
Problem solving
20
8.2
22
33.8
Their responses were grouped under 5 data categories. The frequency
distribution of the data is clearly seen in Table 10. Accordingly, the degree of
75
occurrence of the data can be put in order as follows. In other words, how
frequently these methods of resolving conflicts are appeared in secondary
schools, are put inorder according to the degree of their magnitude in the
following. 1) forcing 2) compromising 3) avoiding 4) preventing 5) Problem
solving.
A quick look at the first two methods in the table clearly shows that the
frequency of managers and teachers does not go parallel with each other.
Majority of the teachers (62%) agreed that the forcing type of resolving conflict
is the most frequently used strategy where as vast majority of the managers
(63.1%) reported that the most frequently used method of resolving conflict is
compromising. Compromising refers to both parties (groups) give up something
to make a mutually acceptable decision while forcing is the technique of
domination where the dominator has the power and authority to enforce his own
views over the opposing party (Chandan, 1994:279-281). The managers seem to
defend themselves as if they don't practise domination methods. They suggested
that compromising is most frequently used way of resolving conflicts.
According to them, they think that compromising is the best way practiced at
present in schools. This controversy between the teachers and managers created
difficulty to know the real situation. Majority of the teachers exposed the
managers that they exercise it. In this case, one can see a difference in opinion
between teachers and managers. The X2 test at p<0.05, X2 = 27.4 revealed that
there is a significant difference between the two groups of respondents.
Regarding the other factors, a considerable number of educational managers
(about 35%) reported that preventing and problem solving are also frequently
applied in resolving conflicts as compared to teachers. But a small number of
76
teachers (about 20%) reported that these methods are used to resolve conflict in
secondary schools. Educational managers, by virtue of their position, seem to
pretend that they practice better ways of resolving conflicts, while teachers
being living witnesses strongly argued that forcing and other domination
methods are being applied in their schools.
77
CHAPTER IV
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 SUMMARY
The main aim of the study was to examine the factors that initiate conflict
between secondary school teachers and educational managers in Addis Ababa
Administrative Region. In addition, it was aimed at devising the proper tactics
for effective management of conflict in secondary schools of Addis Ababa, The
study also aimed at assessing the general views of the concept of conflict.
In order to achieve the objectives, efforts were made to seek possible answers
for the basic questions; which stressed the views of conflict, the types /levels/ of
conflict, the major causes of conflict and conflict management strategies.
The descriptive survey method was carried out for detailed analysis of the data
and the findings for the basic questions. Random sampling technique was also
used to provide a fair representativeness of the sample schools found in the six
zones of Addis Ababa.
78
In an attempt to seek for appropriate solutions, the researcher reviewed a related
litrature. Moreover, a questionnaire was used and interviews were conducted. In
doing so ,effort was made to answer the basic questions by analyzing the data
collected through questionnaire and interview. Regarding the analysis of the
data, the statistical tools employed were percentage, frequency and the chisquare. At last, the study came up with the following major findings.
4.1.1 The study revealed that most educational managers were assigned to the
positions they hold without having the necessary training that enables them to
manage conflicts and deal with other managerial activities.
4.1.2 The study has also revealed that most of the teachers were found to be
reluctant to accept the idea that conflict can bring about a change. But, a
considerable number of managers and teachers agreed that conflict could create
new ideas if it is properly managed.
4.1.3 The majority of teachers believed that there is a poor performance
evaluation system in schools
4.1.4 The study also tried to identify four types /levels/ of conflict. These were
intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup and intergroup conflicts; out of which
the intergroup conflict was found to appear more frequently in school settings.
Different conflict generating factors were also identified for each type of
conflict.
4.1.5 It was reported that the lack of professional commitment i.e, everybody
running after his/her benefits, was found to be the cause of intergroup conflicts.
79
4.1.6 Among the common sources of conflict identified; communication
problems, poor work environment, out dated rules and directives and the
incompetence of educational mangers to deal with conflicts were the major ones
which took the highest share.
4.1.7 It was also reported that educational managers were not in a position to use
the different conflict resolution methods rather, they simply apply bureaucratic
rules such as disciplinary measures to resolve conflicts.
4.1.8 Among the suggested conflict resolving mechanisms, forcing method
showed the highest frequency while compromising and avoiding methods have
shown the higher degree of applications.
4.1.9 Majority of the teachers claimed that there is little or no intragroup conflict
in secondary schools.
4.2 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings, the following concluding remarks were made.
Sex, age and qualification might form diversities in personalities. Besides,
professional competence and training condition of individual respondents may
also contribute to emanating conflict between managers and teachers.
Although most of the teachers have acquired an adequate work experience, some
with many years of services in the same work positions tend to be exhausted and
negligent towards their responsibility. This situation may lead to intrapersonal
and intergroup conflicts. The tendency of teachers to resist new ways of doing
80
things may also be the cause of intergoup conflict. The negative attitude toward
their managers prevented teachers from evaluating their own weaknesses;
because they refused to recognize the possible conflicts that may exist between
and among themselves. This indicates that the disagreement with their bosses is
becoming increasingly high.
Educational administrators, trained in the area of management, can have the
opportunity to use the different techniques of conflict resolution. Besides, they
might know that conflict is the basis of change and development. However the
findings indicated that the absence of trained educational managers or the way
educational leaders manage conflicts by it self can lead to the creation of
conflicts between teachers and managers.
The politically assigned educational managers might be one way or another the
causes of intergroup conflicts (conflict between teachers and managers). For one
reason, teachers may think that they are guided by people who have no the
necessary competence, since the leaders are not assigned on merit basis.
Secondly, managers may feel inferiority complex because there may be
competent staff members with better qualification and work experience who are
more able to manage the educational institutions than them. Therefore, the
assignment of managers on political basis can be the cause of conflict.
The practice of performance evaluation often leads to conflict and
misunderstandings between the teachers and educational managers due to
1) Lack of understanding of the goals of evaluation on the part of teachers,
2) The improper implementation of the issue under consideration by the people
assigned to it. Some school managers relate it to the personal characteristics of
81
workers, and some make a comparison between workers (teachers), instead of
comparing the person with his /her performance.
Above all, the lack of professional commitment, which the researcher was very
much worried about has to be the main agenda of the time for the people who
work in the teaching profession. Professional competency can come through
training but professional commitment is something that calls for devotion and if
need be scarification of life. A good number of respondents underlined that there
is problem of lack of professional commitment. Therefore, it is possible to
conclude that the problem is serious enough to raise conflicts in school
organizations and also hinder any educational development in the system.
Communication problem was found to be the main source of conflicts
commonly found in secondary schools. It is no exaggeration to say that the
communication function is a means by which behavior is modified, changed,
and is effected, information is made productive, and goals are achieved. It is
also a means by which people are linked together in an organization to achieve a
common purpose. Indeed, group activity is impossible without communication.
Therefore, if communication is a means of achieving a certain goals, it is
impossible to achieve educational objectives without it.
However, unlucky school organizations of Addis Ababa seem to be suffered
from communication problems. The findings of the study, indicated that there is
no a healthy communication between educational managers and teachers.
4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
82
On the basis of the findings and conclusions made, the following
recommendations were forwarded.
4.3.1 Effective communication is the responsibility of all persons in the
organization, managers as well as non managers, who work toward a common
aim. The following guidelines can help to solve the problems of communication.
These are :
a) The senders of messages (educational managers) must clarify in their minds
what they want to communicate.
b) While planning to communicate, others (teachers)should be consulted and
encouraged to participate in the process.
c) The needs of receivers (teachers) of the message must be considered.
d) Communication is complete only when the message is understood by the
receiver. The sender must get feedback from the receiver if at all the message is
communicated effectively.
4.3.2 The ability of educational managers to deal with conflicts and their overall
competence to do other managerial activities was found to be very poor. In view
of this , proper management of conflict in secondary schools would be
unthinkable. Therefore, effort has to be made to assign educational managers on
merit basis, or else, place has to be given for those who are trained to be
educational managers.
83
4.3.3 Roles, duties, and responsibilities of teachers and educational managers
have to be clearly demarcated so as to minimize conflicts.
4.3.4 The concerned higher educational officials in the Bureau have to make an
effort to replace the unclear rules and directives by clear and workable
guidelines in order to avoid barriers for effective implementation of educational
programs.
4.3.5 Awareness raising workshops are important for teachers and managers to
deal with the role of conflicts in creating new ideas and, that conflict is the basis
of change and development. Such workshops, seminars and conferences can
bring about a good relationship between teachers and administrators.
4.3.6 There is no one best way of conflict resolution technique that educational
managers can use in every situation. Hence, managers have to be skillful enough
to choose the right conflict resolution method that can satisfy a particular
conflict situation.
At last, the research recommends that, in the future, a detailed study could be
conducted to investigate more about conflict generating factors, effects of
various types of conflicts on teachers performance, and design appropriate
strategies for managing such conflicts in schools.
84
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Andrson, J.G (1968). Bureaucracy in Education. Baltomore: The Johns
Hopkins press.
85
Billisberry, J. ( 1999). Power And Managing Conflict ( Book4), London: The
Open University Printing Press.
Brown, V. and Others (1995). Risks and Opportunities: Environmental
Conflict. London: Earths Can publication.
Campbell, R.F., Carbally, J.E., and Nustrand, R.O. (1983). Introduction to
Educational Administration (6th edition). Boston: Allyn and
Bacon Inc:
Chandan, Jet. (1994). Organizational Behavior, New Delhi: Vikas Publishing
House pvt. Ltd.
Culberston, and others (1960). Administrative Relationships : A case Book.
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Davis, K. and Newstorm, J.W. (1989). Human Behavior at work:
Organizational Behavior 8th ed, Newyork: Mc Graw-Hill Book
Company
Glatter, R. and others (1988). Understanding School management,
Philadelphia: Open University Educational Enterprises Ltd.
Gordon, J.R (1987). A Diagnostic approach to Organizational Behavior.
2nd ed , Boston Allyn and Bacon, Inc
Gray,J.L and Strake,F.A. (1984). Organizational Behavior-Concepts and
Applications (3rd ed.) Columbus Bell and Howell Company.
Hanson, E.M. (1991). Educational Administration and Organizational
Behavior (3rd ed), Boston: Allynard Bacon.
Hellriegel, D. and Slocum,J.W.(1982). Management (3rd ed ) London:
Wesley Publishing company.
Huber, W. (1986). Human Behavior in Organizations (3rd ed) Lincinnate:
South West publishing Co.
86
Hunt, J.W. (1979). Managing People at work :A managers Guide to
Behavior in Organizations. London: McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Hunt, J.W. (1992). Managing people at work: A Manager Guide to Behavior
in Organizations. 3rd,ed, London: McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Ivancevich, J.M and Matteson, M.T. (1990). Organizational Behavior and
Management (2 nded). Boston: R.R Donnelley & sons Company.
Kinard, J. (1988). Management, Toronto: D.C. Health and company.
Kreitner,R and Angelo, K. (1992). Organizational Behavior . 2 nd ed.
Boston : BurrRidge.
Kundu, C.L. and Tutoo, D.N. (1989). Educational Psychology. New Delhi:
Sterling Publishers private Limited.
Luthans, F.(1981). Organizational Behavior. 3 rd ed, New york : Mc Graw-Hill
Book Company.
Miner, Joln B. (1985). The Practice of Management. Columbus : Bell &
Howell company
M.O.E. (1994). Education and Training policy, Addis Ababa: EMPXDA.
Mowday, Steers U. (1985). Managing Effective Organizations, Boston
Kent publishing Company.
Organ, Dennis W. and Bateman , T.s. (1991). Organizational Behavior
(4 th ed.) Boston: donnelly & Sons Company
Owens, R.G. (1987). Organizational Behavior in Education. (3rd ed),
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Inc.
Owens, R.G (1998).Organizational Behavior (6 th ed. ). Englewood cliffs:
Prentice Hall Inc.
87
Pareek, U. (1982). Managing Conflict and Collaboration. New Delhi:
Oxford and IBH publishing Co.
Plunkett, W.R.and Raymond, F. Attner (1989). Introduction to Management,
Boston:PWs-Kent Publishing
Rahim, A.M . (1986). Managing Conflict in Organizations. NewYork
Praeger Publishers.
Rao, V.SP. and Narayan, P.S. (1987). Principles and practice of management,
Delhi: konark Publishers pvt. Ltd.
Rashid, S.A and Archer, M. (1983). Organizational Behavior. Toronto:
Methven.
Robbins, S. (1989). Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies and
Applications (4 th ed . ) New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India
Rue, L.W. and Byars, L.L. (1989)). Supervision: Key Link to Productivity.
Boston : Hoomewood.
Stoner, A.F. and Freeman , R.E. (1989). Management (4th ed ). New Delhi:
prentice Hall of India.
Tery, George R. and stephen G. Franklin (1999). Principles of Management,
(8thed.) Delhi: Nice Printing Press.
Williams , J.C (1978). Human Behavior in Organizations. Cincinnati, Ohio:
South Western Publishing Co.
Journals / periodicals/
Deer, C.B. (1972)." Conflict Resolution in Organizations: Views from the
Field of Educational Administration", Public Administration Review,
vol 32,No.5, pp.495-502
Foder, E.m. (1976).'' Group stress Authoritarian Style of Control and use of
88
power'', Journal of Applied Psychollogy. Vol. 61 No.3, PP 313-318.
Mathur , H.B. and sayeed, O.B (1983)." Conflict Management in
Organizations: Development of Model", The Indian Journal of
social Work, vol, 44 ,No .2, pp. 175-185
Rahim, A.M. (1985)." A Strategy for managing conflict n Complex
Organizations'', The Journal of Human Relations, Vol. 38, No .1,
pp.81-89
Rahim, A.M. and Bonoma, T.V (1979).'' Managing organizational conflict'',
The Journal of psychological Report. vol 44, No.3, PP 1323-1344
Schwenk, C.R (1990).'' Conflict in Organizational Decision Making'',
Management Science Journal. vol 36, No. 4, PP 436-448
Other Unpublished references
Addis Ababa City Administration Education Bureau (2001). '' Educational
Statistics Annual Abstract'', Addis Ababa: Planning and project
Service.
Addis Ababa City Administration Education Bureau (2001).'' A survey on
the Attitude of Teacher Toward Policy Implementation", Addis
Ababa: Educational Programs Department
89
Ayalew Shibeshi (2000)." Educational Policy and Management of change",
(Unpublished Course Guide ) A.A.U,
Fikru Wele (1993).'' A strategy for managing Conflict in the primary Teachers
Training institutes of Ethiopia'', (Unpublished Master Thesis) A.A.U.
Gonie Tegbaru (1998). '' A study on Teacher-Principal Conflicts in Amhara
Secondary Schools'', (Unpublished Master Thesis) A.A.U.
UNESCO (1990)." Basic Training Programme in Educational Planning and
Management "( Book V1 ). Rangkok: Regional Office for Education
in Asia and Oceania.
90