International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2248
ISSN 2229-5518
Project Managers’ Conflict Management Styles and Its Impact on Project Team Motivation in Nigeria Construction Industry Olalekan Mumuni Ogunbayo
————————————————————
ROJECT management is the application of Knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements’’ as defined by Project Management Institute - PMI) [20]. The statement above states the
requirements needed to the deliver the project as expected through project management methodology. Furthermore, the other requirements to achieve project objectives imperative to the Project managers is to initiate, plan, execute, monitor and control the project from the beginning to the end satisfying of all stakeholders. The Project manager accomplishes project success through Project team by motivating all those involved within time, budget, and quality and to the client’s satisfaction. The three constraints in Project management are scope; cost and time are mostly major causes of conflict in Project management as postulated by [28] although other causes are also important as long as they have a negative effect on projects if not properly managed. Project managers being the leader of the team has many issues at stake to complete the project successfully, and those factors always compete with each other not to talk of the contending issues between the team carrying out the tasks.
————————————————
Author:: Olalekan Mumuni Ogunbayo, a Senior Lecturer in Building Technology Department of Lagos State Polytechnic, Ikorodu Campus Shagamu Road, Ikorodu, Lagos State. Nigeria. E-mail olamee62@yahoo.com
The Project manager’s concentration from inception to completion is within the project initiation, planning, execution and close down and conflict that arises at these project phases are reasonably resolved to achieve the set objectives of the project. According to [10] the Project manager uses the required skills in leadership, management, stakeholders’ relationship and conflict management style to achieve project objectives by motivating the team to ameliorate conflict during project life cycle.
However, the project manager should concentrate on applicable constructive conflict management style, which when properly managed the team members’ modify and “grow individually from the conflict involvement of the person affected by the conflict is bigger, coherenc y is formed amongst team members and solution to the problems are found” as postulated by [19] Furthermore, destructive conflicts also occur when decisions are not yet possible on some urgent situation and in the process everyone is held to ransom, the team is polarized, and energy is consumed, and even the team’s motivation is low. As long as the Project manager can identify that destructive conflict has a predictable pattern known as Drama triangle, according to [19]. [19], added that “The Project manager should be able to identify the unproductive roles and effectively handle each team member to prevent some conflict from occurring” and resolve those that do happen.
(Lee, 2008) [15], posited that conflict is part of human reciprocal activity, which require different use of conflict management styles
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2249
ISSN 2229-5518
adopted by the Project manager to maintain harmony within the organisation. The concern “in the construction industry” is the acknowledgement of the required Project managers’ conflict management styles to manage the project from the beginning to the end through the project team from different background, orientation, culture and ego to achieve the project objectives. [15], analysed the implication of subordinates’ response to the Project manager’s use of conflict management styles and when a particular conflict management style is adopted is a determinant to Project team members’ motivation. It is understandably beneficial to the Project manager to acquit himself with conflict management styles to adopt that satisfy the project team, since not taking these into consideration usually lead to demotivation of the team and consequently low project success factor. Demotivation will inevitably affect every facet of any Project management organization as this will result in project time delay, project cost overrun, and low quality product and stakeholders dissatisfaction. Consequently conflict that is supposed to be resolved within the project duration is transformed to dispute that involves the third party, which result inadvertently in project abandonment as in the cases of many projects in Nigerian construction industry. Hence this study seek to determining the extent to which Project manager’s conflict management styles motivate the project team; to rank conflict management styles applicable in project management and determine the relationship between the project managers opinion and that of the project team on project manager’s conflict management techniques on their motivation. The study is imperative at this nascent construction project management practice in Nigeria as the Project managers need to be aware and understand different types of conflict management styles applicable to resolve contending issues to achieve project success. Furthermore, this result if properly understood and appreciated will not allow the return of the industry to the era of projects abandonment, which has been a bane of industrialization and development in the country. The result will also enlighten the Project managers to acquit with the need to increase their project team motivational issues through the use of appropriate conflict management style at different project cycle. The conflict management style adopted in projects makes the Project manager master the act of conflict in construction project management to the advantage of all stakeholders. It is obvious that little or no research has been carried out to justify the impact of Project managers’ conflict management style on Project team motivation. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate currently held perspectives of both Project managers and project team members on conflict management styles that motivate project team members. This study will also shed more light on conflict management techniques that increase or decrease team motivation in project setting.
Project management will soon become a household name in many organisations in Nigeria as its training and development is gaining remarkable development. However, the construction industry is the first area of Project Management practice which by all standards is still at the nascent position. So the study investigating how Project managers’ conflict management styles motivate Project team is of great importance to the Project Management practitioners and other stakeholders. Previous researches have shown that motivated employees in any organisation are unequivocally more productive than unmotivated employee. Therefore the research is concentrated on construction Project management as this is the area of endeavour where its practice is currently defined in relation to its application as in other part of the world.
(Ohlendorf, 2001) [19], [14] and [13], looked at confrontational conflict management style in project management as a situation that allow conflict to be resolved between two parties that result in a win-win situation. The Project manager uses a win-win system to make sure the parties involved meet each other and cooperate to reach a consensus to move everyone forward. [28], explained that confronting conflict involves exchange of views, which solved the conflict by finding alternatives that meet the required solution. This style involves clear and straight communication, and it makes available utmost declaration. [25], posited that confrontation has proven to be the most efficacious of all the conflict management styles since it encourages openness and a cut clear information synthesis from one party to another. [2], and [15], observed that collaboration as integrity which involves more interest in oneself and others, which manifest unobstructed views, communication interchange and evaluation of conflicting issue to reach a consensus. In this system everybody involved are satisfied at the end of the project as everyone wins. [16], [7], [22] and [21], shares [15] views. [24], opined that in confrontation conflict management styles, the work and the individual in the group are respected and the style is defined as a problem-solving situation and it is settled by negotiation. He suggests the following guidelines for confrontation which are: confront the problem succinctly by jointly discussing the conflict and negotiate for result; open communication and comprehension of the other party’s point of view are extremely beneficial. [16], described integrating as the best practice in that its approach is free, and all the necessary information are exchanged between participants and the different circumstances are carefully studied to reach an amicable solution, so the process of uncovering the conflict is what earn its first nomenclature “ confrontation” as the case may be.
Dominating conflict management style as [2], [7], [21] and [9] put it is a condition of high concern for one self and low concern for others as it is an indication of establishing one’s idea over others leading to win-lose situation, which encourages forcing to win at the expense of other team members. Hence this method is good in any organization that has production related goals like in the construction industry. In this case, individual use his power scheme and attack which in effect accomplish his goal, but it has been seen not to be suitable at the relational level. [19] and [13], explained that unending conflict may encourage the use of dominating style as [15] believed that the situation encourages assertiveness and cooperativeness in any organization. [28] Looked at the general condition as others and concluded that it creates hard feeling in which the loser will retaliate in another form or way. [21], explained that this style is not good when team work is the solution to the pending problem, as it is a frequent occurrence in the construction project management. It is good for courses of action that is unpopular, and it is not for a team that their expertise is the reason the project took off. The project manager that uses this technique will become an authoritarian or a dictator and the project will suffer the consequences as the project team members that are assertive may not respond and in the process morale is low, motivation nosedive and performance are weakened. At the end, it becomes a bargaining tool for the project team members, who will weaken the project manager thus his power and authority may be usurped. [24], explained it as taking advantage of others for unreasonable purpose and also [7], [25] and [22] accepted it as to win is gained absolute control over others who are as not as powerful as the other party.
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2250
ISSN 2229-5518
Compromising is considered to be give and take, that is a concern for self and others, according to [15] and [28] see compromising is to bargain to solve the pending conflict that satisfy both parties, and it always caters for unequivocal resolve. It is also considered being given and takes the situation that is concern for self and others. [15], observe, that dividing the difference, exchanging concession or seeking equilibrium constant is the main attribute of compromising conflict in any organization. [13], has the same opinion as [28], but he added that the team members or situation are moderately assertive and cooperative. However, [19] and [21] looked at compromising as give and take method which leaves both parties to accept some degrees of satisfaction. Therefore, it is good to use when both parties need to win; there is a deadlock, time is not enough, need to maintain the relationship are crucial, and there is no suitable time, that is both parties gain something to lose something. [21], added that it is always useful when time is important, and the protracted conflict should be avoided. The style is not appropriate for complex issues and when there is position power difference between parties involved. [21], [25], [15] and [22] admit there is equilibrium as it gives more than dominating, but less than an obliging party. [5], observed compromising style as a half- hearted problem solving, which its adoption always lead to abasement of the weaker party.
Yielding allow point of view of everyone and synthesises to have an agreement and allegiance of the parties involved in conflict, which always produce a long lasting term solution. [18], stated the following values as the extent of use in percentage of conflict management styles in Nigeria competitor 20%, collaborator 19.64%, compromiser 24.64%, Avoider 20.71% and Accommodator 15.01%. The assessment was not categorical as the result was of a general situation in the country. However, the issues at stake are to throw more light on conflict management in the construction industry. Collaboration as he opined is when an individual pave way for themselves and others to resolve the conflict at hand to a logical conclusion. [21], [22], [7] and [28] discuss that collaboration resolution style indicates concern for oneself and other at the same time which through assertiveness and cooperation it encourages openness, exchange of information and proposing a solution that is accepted by all parties. Its final results are win-win situation according to [25] and the result benefit the parties involved. However, [1] explained that yielding conflict management style is adopted when one party is sure that the intention of the other party is suitable, and the contending issue is of benefit to the party involved.
Avoiding is the situation of conflict avoider as they ignore it and look somewhere else whenever conflict arises. The concern is not for self or only other person. It shows unassertiveness and un-cooperation according to [14] and [15] while [6] looked at it as low concern for self and others. [29], [16], [8], [21] and [5] have the same opinion on yielding as this is a common issue when triviality of the issue in contention is not of any importance.[7], observe that those who tend to use avoiding styles of conflict resolution are all equipped to deal with disputes that require some attention, and such Project managers have a hard time representing themselves and at the same time low concern for others interests makes them less able to understand and address other people’s problems. Thus, they and other parties to a conflict will lack the
basic knowledge needed to construct solutions to this conflict. [27],
looked at avoidance as a situation that always occurs in relationship blackout amongst the parties caused by unassertiveness and uncooperative conflict handling style [25], describe it as an attitude of not confronting the issue rather ignores hold off on addressing the problem.[16], described avoidance as love to avoid officialdom rules and laws imposed by situations that surround the conflict; error avoiders and appointment of yes men is a method of avoiding conflict. [29], attributed conflict avoidance as passive response to conflict in which the concern for both parties is ignored. [24], referred to avoiding conflict as it usually result in a situation where neither the original goal nor the relationship is paramount in the contending issue, so it is of no benefit to any party. [15], posited that avoidance is low concern for self and others as [24] explained it. [19], described avoiding conflict as shelving an issue for future or receding from the state of affair altogether, which is a temporary solution that will soon resurface. [21], in his estimate concluded that it is low concern for self and others as it has been linked with back-down, buck-passing or side stepping situation. It may be used when the potential dysfunctional effect of confronting the other person outweighs the benefit of the resolution of conflict. It may be used to treat some trivial issues, but [29] objected to this as this will soon become a bigger problem.
Motivation is the open-ended situation as it is relational to the person involved and his state of mind at the intended duration of activity. Cognoscenti like Maslow in 1954; Herzberg et al 1959; Alderfer in 1969; McClelland in 1961 and McGregor in 1960 have established general principle on motivation without any bias on a particular industry as posited by [26], and fortunately their discoveries are still the basics in all industries. Their general explanation according to [3] is concentrated on individual needs that determine motivational level is coined content theory of motivation. Content theory is individual motivational factor that is within, but can be influenced by extrinsic factors, which are the primary needs of individual called natural instinct. [8], further explained the secondary needs as a psychological requirements, which experience acquired is essential to its relevance. The secondary needs are also determined by culture and individuality. [8], concluded that motivation of team is influenced by purpose, challenge, comradeship, responsibility, growth and leadership for the Project manager to effectively manage his team to achieve project objectives.
(Eight-to-late, 2008) [6], explained that “project management has moved from the technical aspect of the profession to people-oriented factors as motivation, and there is a strong relationship between leadership and power and motivation”. Motivation in project management is viewed by [8] as the desire to respond to do something as it is interesting while the other is the desire to respond to do something because of the expected remuneration that is akin to the activity. He further explained that inclusive leadership or management style is contributory to intrinsic motivation whereas sole approach relies on extrinsic motivation.[4], emphasised that motivation schemes on construction site workers should not be centred on monetary incentives because it destroys intrinsic motivation, which makes construction site workers be less productive. He proposed that intrinsic motivation should be encouraged so that parallel positioning of incentive structures with motivation can result in successful projects for the client and economic and psychological advantage to the contractor.
(Schmid, 2006) [23], posited that a project manager should have skills to steer a project team through respective project stages and project life
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2251
ISSN 2229-5518
cycles, but team motivation sometime is far less tangible as an important element of a successful project. His emphasises clear communication during the early stage of the project by taking advantage of motivational techniques and determining factor that decreases team motivation. [20], emphasizes that the ability to motivate a project team and other stakeholders are one of the most interpersonal skills a Project manager should possess. Attainment of project goal through a highly motivated team can make a difference between a smooth project progresses or one that is ideal of a motivated project team may seem like common sense, but is difficult for project managers to understand because the definition of motivation varies among researchers that established standard of its functional ideal. [12], recommends that psychological process is most appropriate means of showing workers how to accomplishing project objectives; furthermore the managers should understand motivational approach that is very effective when expecting higher output from their subordinates.
(Huszczo, 2004) [11], remarked that motivation is primarily a function of two things: expectations and reinforcement and other researchers have explained the motivation as a degree of strength a worker brings to work. [11], advice that Project managers should avail themselves of different motivational techniques, which depend on stage the team is in the project. [20], defines motivation in a project setting as “energizing the team to accomplish a high level of performance and to overcome barriers to change”. The Project managers’ input in working with the team is to achieve the set goal is essential to the project success. Successful project management is more than simply working within the scope of project management constructs and techniques, nevertheless understanding how motivation works from the project manager’s perspective remains unclear.
The researcher visited construction companies that are executing projects in order to give the questionnaire to the respondents, who are from the industry. The Project managers and their team are from the construction industry background in the likes of Architects, Structural Engineers, Electrical Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Quantity Surveyors, Builders and Estate Surveyors. The data were inferentially and relationally analysed through the use of spearman rank correlation coefficient to determine their degree of association. The questionnaires have the demographic information of the respondents in section A, and in section B has the Likert scale of five variables of different conflict management styles. The scales have the minimum 1 and maximum 5, in which the Dutch Test for Conflict Handling and [28] constant variables on different conflict management styles. The respondents answered the questionnaires in five scale point in which the minimum 1
= not at all, to 5 = very much. The Project managers and the project team answered the same set of questionnaires and these reduce bias on both set of respondents’ response.
The hypotheses tested to determine the significance of the questions raised are listed accordingly.
H0 : project managers” Avoiding ‘’conflict management style does not motivate project team members.
H0 : project manager’s Accommodating conflict management style does not motivate project team members.
H0 : Project managers compromising conflict management style does not motivate project team members.
H0 : Project managers “Forcing conflict management style’’ does not motivate project team members.
H0 : Project management “Confronting conflict management style does not motivate project team members.
H0 : there is no significant relationship between Project manager’s conflict management styles and project team members’ motivation
The following formulae were used to determine degree of relationship that is Spearman correlation coefficient.
1. r=1-6∑d² …………………………………………equation 1 n(n² -1)
2. t-test at 95% confidence level of null hypotheses (H₀) and alternative (H₁) determined the Spearman rank correlation
coefficient
3. t=r s √n-2 ……………………………………….....equation 2
1-r²
The determinant was on whether the t calculated was greater or lesser than the critical value of t for (N-2) degree of freedom
The respondents are consultants from the construction industry in the likes of Architects, Builders, Structural Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Electrical Engineers, Quantity surveyors and Estate Surveyors. The table 1 below show details of questionnaire distribution and returns.
TABLE1.
RESPONDENTS THAT ARE PROJECT MANAGERS (GROUP A)
Respondents No. of Returned Percentage of
Questionnaire Questionnaire Return
Architects 15 9 60.00
Builders 16 7 43.75
Quantity Surveyors 16 10 62.50
Estate Surveyors 14 8 57.14
Mechanical Engineers 8 1 12.50
Electrical Engineers 7 1 14.28
Structural Engineers 10 2 20.00
94 38
The above table shows that 62.50% of the Quantity Surveyors responded to the questionnaire, and it is the highest response followed by Architects, which are 60.00%. The others in descending order Estate Surveyors, 57.14% third, Builders fourth 43.75%, Structural Engineers
20.00%, Electrical Engineers 14.28% and Mechanical Engineers
12.50%. There is a clear indication that Project management practice in the construction industry is in favour of Architects, Builders, Quantity Surveyors and Estate Surveyors as they are more involved than other professionals like Mechanical Engineers, Electrical Engineers and Structural Engineers. The table also shows the degree of engagement of the professional as Project managers. The result above is serendipitous as this was not part of the study objectives.
TABLE2.
RESPONDENTS THAT ARE PROJECT TEAM MEMBER (GROUP B)
Respondents No. of Returned Percentage of
Questionnaire Questionnaire Returned Q.
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2252
ISSN 2229-5518
Architects 32 17 53.13
Builders 38 15 39.47
Quantity Surveyors 45 24 53.33
Estate Surveyors 28 16 57.14
Mechanical Engineers 35 15 42.86
Electrical Engineers 35 17 48.57
Structural Engineers 31 23 74.19
244 127
Table 2 above indicate that the Structural Engineers response is the highest 74.19% followed by the Estate Surveyors 57.14% and the third on the table is Quantity Surveyors 53.33. Others are Architects 53.13%, Electrical Engineers, Mechanical Engineers 42.86% and Builders
39.47%. The respondent’s professional background has no effect on their role as a consultant under any Project manager.
The spearman correlation coefficient used confirms the correlation between the opinions of the two groups of respondents. A table 3 show that the project managers avoid confrontation about the differences between the team is the highest mean score of 0.50 while the project team have the project manager trying to avoid confrontation with the team members 0.450. Is the first on the team’s response that motivates the team than any other parameter?
TABLE3.
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENT ON AVOIDING
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE.
Parameters P m’s R P. Team R W .Av. R Mean Mean Mean
1. I avoid confrontation about
differences between my team 0.500 1 0.400 2 0.450 2
2. I avoid differences of opinion
of my team as much as possible 0.489 2 0.370 3 0.430 3
3. I try to make differences loom
less severe among my team 0.458 4 0.360 4 0.409 4
4. I try to avoid confrontation
with my team Members 0.479 3 0.450 1 0.465 1
Note: W,Av.- Weighted Average; PM- Project Manager; PT- Project Team; R- Ranking
The weighted average in table indicates that the project manager’s avoiding confrontation with his team is the highest 0.465 that motivate the team members.[19], [21] and [28], confirmed that avoiding conflict suggests that the consequences of confronting the other party is greater than the advantage of confronting the conflict. [21], further explained that avoiding conflict management style can be used when minor issues or in a situation where the aftermath of the contending issue should not affect the expected problem to be solved. The project manager’s acquired skill and experiences will be used to determine the issues that are minor or major for him to effectively avoid conflict that will not resurface during the project [21], proposed four ways in which this style is not appropriate: when the issue at stake is of great value to a party; when time is not enough; there is urgent decision is to be made and
when the party involved must make the decision.
TABLE4
TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE ON AVOIDING CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
STYLE IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT.
Parameter rs t-cal t-tab Accept H0 sign
Project managers and
project team members opinion 0.4 0.952 4.303 Yes 0.05
The test result 4.303 (t-tabulated) is greater than (t-calculated) 0.952 indicates that we accept H0 and reject the null hypothesis and thus conclude that Project Managers’ adoption of avoiding conflict management style did not significantly impact Project Team motivation.
TABLE5
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENT ON ACCOMMODATING
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE
Parameters
Accommodating conflict: Emphasizes area of agreement rather than areas of difference and provides only short term solution
1.I agree that I may be wrong 0.821 1 0.860 2 0.841 2
2.I allow peace to reign, so give in
to the team members decision 0.805 3 0.882 1 0.844 1
3.I sacrifice my concern to satisfy
my team members 0.795 4 0.877 3 0.836 3
4.I yield to my team’s decision on
the project at the expense of goal 0.816 2 0.810 4 0.813 4
Note: W,Av.- Weighted Average; PM- Project Manager; PT- Project Team; R- Ranking
The result in table 5 shows that the Project manager allows peace to reign, so he accepts teams’ decision is the highest in the weighted average that motivates the project team more than any other parameter. The second on the ranking order is the he agrees that he may be wrong, followed by the sacrifices his concern to satisfy project team members. The last on the ranking order is that the Project manager yield to his team’s decision at the expense of his goal. However, the Project manager always agrees he may be wrong is first and second on the teams’ decision. According to [28], [19] and [21] accommodating is very essential when the project manager is not sure whether he is wrong or right; the issue on the ground is important to the other party; when one party is ready to release something in exchange for another; when one party is not strong enough and when there is an intention to keep the relationship going. (On the other hand) accommodating conflict management style is not suitable when the issue is not important to one of the parties; when one party believe that he is right, and the other party is not good.
The spearman correlation coefficient is very low 0.2, thus the Project
manager opinion and that of the Project team is not very strong on the issue of accommodating conflict, and the extent of adoption is very minimal.
TABLE6.
TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE ON ACCOMMODATING CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT STYLE.
Parameter rs t-cal t-tab Accept H0 Sign
Project managers’ and
Project teams’ opinion 0.20 0.467 4.303 Yes 0.05
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2253
ISSN 2229-5518
The test result 4.303 (t-tabulated) is greater than (t-calculated ) 0.467 indicates that we accepted H 0 and reject the null hypothesis and thus conclude that Project Managers’ adoption of accommodating conflict management style did not significantly impact Project Team morale
Compromising conflict style management, the result in table six shows the weighted average 0.767 is the highest, and it suggest that Project managers try to realise a middle-of-the-road solution in resolving conflict followed by the need for both parties to have a little 0.759. The third is he emphasises finding a compromise solution 0.731 and the forth are striving whenever possible towards fifty-fifty compromise
0.726. Notwithstanding, the result on the side of project managers is the same as the weighted average, but the mean is 0.758 and on the
project team are that the Project manager insist we both give a little
0.781. Compromising conflict according to [19], [28] and [21] is very important when mutual benefit between the two parties involved is the
issue, and this is essential when irregular solution is to solve an intricate problem and it has proven that other styles cannot be very effective. This style is very effective when there is an urgent need to end a prolonged conflict. This style is unsuitable for complex problem that needs problem-solution attack, and when one of the parties involved can use position power to take advantage of the other party.
TABLE7.
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENT ON COMPROMISING
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE
Parameters PM R P T R W .Av. R Mean Mean Mean
Compromising conflict: searches for and bargain for solution that bring some degree of satisfaction to all parties and provide definite resolution
1.I try to realise a middle-of-the-road
solution 0.758 1 0.776 2 0.767 1
2.I emphasise that we have to find a
compromise solution 0.716 3 0.745 4 0.731 3
3.I insist we both give a little 0.737 2 0.781 1 0.759 2
4.I strive whenever possible towards
fifty-fifty compromise 0.705 4 0.746 3 0.726 4
Note: W,Av.- W eighted Average; PM- Project Manager; PT- Project Team; R- Ranking
The spearman correlation coefficient result indicates that the
relationship between the opinion of the Project managers and that of their team is very high 1.0.
TABLE8
TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE ON COMPROMISING CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT STYLE
Parameter rs t-cal t-tab Accept H0 Sign
Project managers’ and
Project Teams opinion 1.0 1.414 4.303 Yes 0.05
The test result 4.303 (t-tabulated) is greater than (t-calculated ) 1,414 indicates that we accepted H 0 and reject the null hypothesis and thus conclude that Project Managers’ adoption of compromising conflict management style did not significantly impact Project Team motivation
The result of the weighted average on the table below indicates that the Project team are motivated when the Project manager adopt forcing conflict management style is when one party is doing everything to win (0.624) followed by one party is fighting for a good outcome for himself
(0.623); when one party is pushing his own point of view at the expense of others (0.602) and lastly when one party is searching for gains at all cost (0.602). [28], [19] and [21] explained that forcing conflict management style may be appropriate when the issue is not important; the result is urgent; to suppress an overconfidence subordinate; when subordinate lack necessary skill and expertise to make a technical determination on the pending issue. They also asserted that forcing conflict management style may not be appropriate in the following situations: when the issue is intricate; the issue is not important to the Project manager; both parties are equally powerful; speedy decision is not urgent and when the team member is very competent on the area in contention.
TABLE9
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENT ON FORCING
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE
Parameters PM R PT R W .Av R Mean Mean Mean
Forcing: pushes one’s viewpoint at the expense of others, offers only win-lose solution is retaliatory
1.I push my own point of view at the
expense of other views 0.500 3 0.704 3 0.602 3
2.I search for gains 0.453 4 0.635 4 0.544 4
3.I fight for a good outcome for myself 0.526 1 0.720 2 0.623 2
4.I do everything to win 0.505 2 0.743 1 0.624 1
Note: W,Av.- Weighted Average; PM- Project Manager; PT- Project Team; R- Ranking
The spearman correlation coefficient result 0.70 is strong, meaning that the opinion of the Project manager and his team correlates on forcing conflict management style.
The test of significance suggests that the H0 should be accepted since the t-calculated is lower than t-tabulated.
TABLE 10
TEST OF SIGNIFICANT ON FORCING CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE
Parameter rs t-cal t-tab Accept H0 sign
Project managers; and
Project teams’ opinion 0.70 2.745 4.303 Yes 0.05
The test result 4.303 (t-tabulated) is greater than (t-calculated ) 2.745 indicates that we accepted H 0 and reject the null hypothesis and thus conclude that Project Managers’ adoption of conflict management style did not significantly impact Project Team morale4.6 Analysis of result on confrontational conflict management style
The results of the weighted average indicate that the Project team are motivated when the Project manager adopt confrontational conflict management style 0.947, which suggest that the Project manager always work out solution that serves him and his team interest as good as possible. The second on the table is when the Project manager examines ideas from both sides to find a mutually optimal solution. The third and fourth are the Project manager stand for his and team’s goals and interests, and he examines issues until a solution that satisfy both parties respectively. The result of the analysis suggests that Project manager frequently uses confrontational conflict management style than any other style. [21], [28] and [19] posited that the situation where confrontation is appropriate are when the issue is complex, which is one of the major attribute of project management; there is need for synthesis of suggestions to bring out required solution and allegiance required from the other parties for successful implementation of the
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2254
ISSN 2229-5518
project deliverables. Others are when time is available for problem solving, which suggest that Project managers usually apply confrontation conflict management style during project initiating and planning; when one party alone cannot solve the problem that is synergising is very essential and each party provide resources required to solve the common problem.
The result of Test of significant indicates that there is very strong correlation between the opinion of Project managers and the project
team about the impact of Project manager’s confrontational management style and project team members’ motivation.
TABLE 11
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENT ON CONFRONTATIONAL CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE
allowed degenerate beyond an acceptable level. Forcing is adopted by the Project manager when the subordinates lack technical expertise to make meaningful decision and the need to overcome assertive subordinate according to [21]. Avoiding conflict management style is the fifth and indicates that it is used when the issues are trivial; potential dysfunctional effect of confronting the other party outweighs benefits of resolution and cooling off period is needed as posited by [21], as it is very relevant at the project initiation and close down.
TABLE13.
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENT ON ALL CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT STYLES
Parameters P M R P T R W .Av. R
Parameters P M R P T R W .Av. R Mean Mean Mean
Confrontation: treat conflict as a problem to be solved by examining differing alternatives,
Avoiding conflict – Retreat from an actual or potential conflict situation and avoiding does not solve the problem.
1.I avoid confrontation about differences
Mean Mean Mean
requires give and take attitude and open
dialogue and provides ultimate resolution.
1.I examine issues until I find a solution that
satisfy me and my team 0.837 4 0.933 4 0.885 4
2.I stand for my own and my team members
goal and interest 0.900 3 0.937 3 0.919 3
3.I examine ideas from both sides to find a
mutually optimal solution 0.905 2 0.951 2 0.928 2
4.I work out a solution that serves me and
my team interest as good as possible 0.916 1 0.977 1 0.947 1
between my team 0.500 15.5 0.400 18 0.450 18
2.I avoid differences of opinion of my
team as much as possible 0.489 17 0.370 19 0.430 19
3.I try to make differences loom less severe
among my team 0.458 19 0.360 20 0.409 20
4.I try to avoid confrontation with my
team Members 0.479 18 0.450 17 0.465 17
Mean of the four parameters 0.482 5 0.395 5 0.439 5
Accommodating conflict: Emphasizes area
of agreement rather than areas of
difference and provides only short
Note: W,Av.- Weighted Average; PM- Project Manager; PT- Project Team; R- Ranking
TABLE12.
TEST OF SIGNIFICANT ON CONFRONTATIONAL CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLE
Parameter rs t-cal t-tab Accept H 0 Sign
Project managers’ and
Project teams’ opinion 1.0 1,414 4.303 Yes 0.05
term solution
1. I agree that I may be wrong 0.821 5 0.860 7 0.841 6
2. I allow peace to reign, so give in to the
team members decision 0.805 7 0.882 5 0.844 5
3.I sacrifice my concern to satisfy my
team members 0.795 8 0.877 6 0.836 7
4.I yield to my team’s decision on the
project at the expense of goal 0.816 6 0.810 8 0.813 8
Mean of the four parameters 0.809 2 0.857 2 0.834 2
Compromising conflict: searches for and
bargain for solution that bring some
The test result 4.303 (t-tabulated) is greater than (t-calculated ) 1.414 indicates that we accepted H 0 and reject the null hypothesis and thus conclude that Project Managers’ adoption of conflict management style did not significantly impact Project Team motivation
The table below shows the five conflict management styles that indicate the weighted average of all parameters. The table show that confrontational conflict management style is the most frequently used, which suggest that it is used mostly during project initiation and planning. Thus the project managers and their team confront issues like identification, analysis and management of potential risks. The next on the table is Project managers adopt accommodating conflict management style during project execution, monitoring, controlling and close down; although there are no research findings to establish this as risk identification and analysis are not relevant at this stage only risk management. Compromising is the third on the table, and it balances situation that is finding equilibrium to balance the power. Compromising is very ideal during project initiation and planning where all the give and take needs to be rationalized and resolved in order not to compromise the requirements of the project. The parties are assertive and moderately cooperative. Compromising can also be adopted during project execution; monitoring, controlling and project close down. Forcing is the fourth on the table is not very good during the project initiation and planning as it is retaliatory and this may disrupt the project later and as such it may be very necessary during project execution,
degree of satisfaction to all parties and provide definite resolution
1.I try to realise a middle-of-the-road
4. I strive whenever possible towards
fifty-fifty compromise 0.705 12 0.746 11 0.726 12
Mean of the four parameters 0.729 3 0.762 3 0.746 3
Forcing: pushes one’s viewpoint at the expense of others, offers only win-lose solution is retaliatory
1.I push my own point of view at the
expense of other views 0.500 15.5 0.704 15 0.602 14
2. I search for gains 0.453 20 0.635 16 0.544 15
3. I fight for a good outcome for myself 0.526 13 0.720 14 0.623 13
4. I do everything to win 0.505 14 0.743 13 0.624 16
Mean of the four parameters 0.496 4 0.701 4 0.598 4
Confrontation: treat conflict as a problem to be solved by examining differing alternatives, requires give and take attitude and open dialogue and provides
1.I examine issues until I find a solution
that satisfy me and my team 0.837 4 0.933 4 0.885 4
2.I stand for my own and my team
members goal and interest 0.900 3 0.937 3 0.919 3
3.I examine ideas from both sides to find
a mutually optimal solution 0.905 2 0.951 2 0.928 2
4.I work out a solution that serves me and
my team interest as good as possible 0.916 1 0.977 1 0.947 1
mean of the four parameters 0.890 1 0.950 1 0.920 1
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2255
ISSN 2229-5518
Note: W,Av.- Weighted Average; PM- Project Manager; PT- Project Team; R- Ranking
The spearman correlation coefficient 0.96 on the variables indicate very strong relationship on the opinions of project managers and that of their project team on the issue of impact of conflict management style on project team motivation.
TABLE14
TEST OF SIGNIFICANT OF ALL CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLES
Parameters rs t-cal t-tab Accept H 0 Sign
Project Managers’ and
Project teams’ opinion 0.96 5,195 2.10 No 0.05
The test result 4.303 (t-tabulated) is lesser than (t-calculated) 5.195 indicates that we reject H0 and accept the null hypothesis and thus conclude that Project Managers’ adoption of all conflict management style significantly impact Project Team motivation
The study examines the impact of project manager’s conflict management style on Project team member’s motivation. The objectives are: identifying the applicable conflict management styles; ascertaining the relationship between the project manager’s conflict management style and project team motivation and confirming the extent to which conflict management styles improve project team motivation. The respondents are the project managers and the project team members are from the construction industry. The two groups’ responses were statistically analysed to reduce any form of bias and the correlation carried out on all the five parameters indicated positive relationships. Furthermore, avoiding conflict management style indicate a weak correlation of 0.40; the case of accommodating conflict management style is a very weak correlation of 0.2; compromising and confronting conflict management style are 1.0 each, which are very strong and forcing conflict management style that is 0.70 thus is strong. However, the hypothesis carried out indicates that the five hypotheses suggest that there no significant relationship between Project managers adoption of Avoiding, Accommodating, Forcing, Compromising and Confronting management styles and their impact on Project team motivation. The test of significant of all conflict management styles suggests that there is a relationship between Project managers’ adoption of all conflict management styles and Project team morale. This establish the fact that all the conflict management styles are essential as the experience and knowledge of the Project manager and the issues at stake will determine which particular conflict management style is most appropriate to use in a project life cycle. This is very ideal in consideration for the project managers’ conflict management style and it effect on the project team motivation. The result of the study suggests that Project Manager’s conflict management style do motivate Project team members. The ranking orders indicate the confronting conflict management style is the most important of the five followed by accommodating and compromising respectively, and others are forcing fourth and avoiding fifth.
The result of the study suggests that conflict management styles is a major factors the Project managers need to motivating project team members to accomplish project objectives. Conflict management training is imperative to Project managers’ certification as this will give them basic knowledge about conflict management and leave the advance knowledge needs to the field. Motivating project team members in projects should be paramount in Project managers’ agenda as this will heighten their interest to excel and finish the project as
earlier agreed. The basic condition of project management in relation to conflict management is to make sure the project conflict does not go out of the project through the skill, knowledge and experience of project manager.
The Project managers need to resolve the conflict by confirming, if the conflict is within the project or outside the project. The source of the conflict that does not have any bearing with the project should be solved as appropriately, whilst the ones that directly concern the project should be abjectly investigated and resolved from the root rather than from the surface. The Project managers should develop their social skills in order to understand the team and have a good relationship to resolve conflict that has relational issues.
Lastly, the researcher recommends that Project managers should be dynamic in conflict management approach so that the most appropriate conflict management style is adopted at an appropriate project life cycle to ensure that project objectives are achieved.
The suggested area of further research is the relationship between the Project managers’ conflict management style and project success and Project managers’ conflict management style during the project life cycle.
REFERENCES
[1] Appelbaum, H. S., & Shapiro, B. (1998). The Management of
Multi Group Conflict. Team Performance Management, Vol. 4
No. 5, 211-234.
[2] Cheung, C. C. (1999). Conflict Management Style in Hong Kong Industries. International Journal of Project Management Vol. 17, No. 6, 393-399.
[3] Cliffsnotes. (2013, April 17). Principle of Management: Motivation Theories: Individual Needs. Retrieved April 24,
2013, from Cliffsnotes: http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/Motivation-Theories- individual-Needs.topic...
[4] Darrington, J. (2010). Addressing Human Motivation in
Construction Contracts. The Voice of Consruction Industry,
18-19.
[5] Dreu, C. K., Evers, A., Beersma, B., Kluwer, E., & Nauta, A. (2001). A Theory-based Measure of Conflict Management Strategies in the W orkplace. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 645-668.
[6] Eight-to-late. (2008, August 29). Motivation in Project Management. Retrieved April 04, 2013, from Eight-to-late: http://www.eight2late.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/motivation- inproject-management/
[7] Friendman, R. A., Tidd, S. T., & Tsai, S. C. (2000). W hat
Goes Around Comes Around: The Impact of Personal Conflict
Style on W ork Conflict and Stress. The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, 32-55.
[8] Grazier, P. (1998, January). Team Motivation. Retrieved April
05, 2013, from Team Motivation:
http://www.teambuilding.com/article_teammotivation.htm
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013 2256
ISSN 2229-5518
[9] Hans, A., & Bariki, A. S. (2012). Conflict Management Styles in Oil and Gas Sector in Sultanate of Oman. International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management Vol. 4 No. 1, 1-15.
[10] Hoffer, J. A., Valacich, J. S., & George, J. (2002). managing the information Systems Project: In Modern Systems Analysis
& Design. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
[11] Huszczo, G. E. (2004). Tools foo Team Leadership: Delivering the X-factor in Team Excellence. Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black Pub.
[12] Huszczo, G. E. (2004). Tools for Team Exellence: Delivering the X Factor. In G. E. Huszczo, Tools for Team Exellence: Delivering the X Factor (pp. 131-158). Davies-Black.
[13] Khanaki, H., & Hassanzadeh, N. (2010). Conflict Management Styles: The Iranian General Preference to the Swedish. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, vol. 1, No. 4, 419-426.
[14] Kuhn, T., & and Poole, M. S. ( 2000). Do Conflict Management Styles Affect Group Decision Making? Human Communication Research, Vol. 26 No. 4,, 558-590.
[15] Lee, K. L. (2008). An Examination between the Relationships of Conflict Management Styles and Employees Satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Management, 11-25.
[16] Leeds, C. A. (1992). The French Approach to Handling Conflicts and to Negotiating: Certain Notable Features. First International Construction Management Conference (pp. 152-
162). Manchester: E & FN SPON.
[17] Marisa, A., & Yusof, N. (2012). Motivation Among the anagers in Construction Companies. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. 62, 22-26.
[18] Mohammed, U., Prabhakar, G., & W hite, G. (2008). Culture and Conflict Management Style of International Project Managers. International Journal of Business Management, 3-
11.
[19] Ohlendorf, A. (2001). Conflict Resolution in Project Management. Retrieved February 02, 2003, from http://www.umsl.edu/~sauter/analysis/488_f01_papers/Ohlen dorf.htm: http://www.umsl.edu/~sauter/analysis/488_f01_papers/Ohlen dorf.htm
[20] PMBOK. (2004). A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, 3rd Ed. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
[21] Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a Theory of Managing Organizational Conflict. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 206-235.
[22] Ricky, K. T., & Leung, M.-y. (2001). Investigation of Construction Conflict Resolution in Hong Kong. 17th Annual ARCOM Conference. (pp. 785-792). University of Salford:
Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Vol. 1.
[23] Schmid, B., & Adams, J. (2006, April 12). Motivation in Project management: Project management Perspective. Retrieved May 15, 2012, from Motivation in Project management: Project management Perspective: http://www.pmi.org/~/media/PDF/surveys/pp_Schmid.ashx.
[24] Smith, K. A. (2002). Teamwork and Project Management.
USA: McGraw-Hill.
[25] Thammavijitdej, P. (2000). Interdisciplinary Conflict and Resolution as Cultural Behaviour Among Architects and Engineers. Thammasat Review, 50-64.
[26] Thwala, W . D., & Monese, L. N. (2006). Motivation as a tool to improve productivity on the construction site. Retrieved June 19, 2012, from http://www.motivation.com
[27] Tjosvold, D., Chen, Y., & and Yu, Z.-y. (2003). Conflict Management for Individual Problem Solving and Team Innovation in China. 16th Annual IACM conference (pp. 1-43). Melbourne: Social Science Research Network.
[28] Verma, V. K. (1998). Conflict Management. The Project
Management Institute Project Management Handbook.
[29] Zikmann, R. (1992). Successful Conflict Management. First
International Construction Management Conference (pp. 53-
57). Manchester: E & FN SPON.
IJSER © 2013 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2013
ISSN 2229-5518
2257
1-BER IS) 2013