Communication, Motivation, and Conflict in Team Negotiations

Name

Institution

Course

Instructor

Date

Communication, Motivation, and Conflict in Team Negotiations

Communication motivation, collaboration, and conflict resolution are all critical in

negotiations. This paper addresses the following questions regarding the simulation team and how

these aspects affected contract negotiations. By contributing the five stages of group formation, the

types of communication barriers, the types of conflict encountered, and the motivational strategies

used in this team negotiation process, this paper briefly reflects the whole negotiation.

Stages of Group Formation in the Simulation

The development of any group is often marked by distinct stages, as outlined in

Tuckman’s theory of group formation, which identifies five key phases: The five phases that are;

forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning (West Chester University, 2022). In the

process observed when the team was practicing during the "To Strike a Deal "simulation, evidence

was observed in more than one stage of the process, pointing majorly to storming and norming.

During the forming stage, team members first got to know one another while evaluating each

other's strengths and weaknesses. However, as far as the group was concerned, the enactment of

the first meetings involved the following characteristics: misunderstanding, conflict of interests

and objectives, and the battle for control, which shows the storming stage. Some standard features

that differentiate this stage from other functional stages include conflict since people in the team

are likely to sort out their issues of power and assertiveness while developing the roles they will be

assigning to themselves. This was evident in the simulation where the members disagreed on the

negotiation strategies where some of the members were dominant over others while some were

even afraid to speak.

When the simulation was in progress the team gradually entered the norming stage, where

interpersonal relationships start becoming more developed, processes are characterized by

cooperation and unity. At this stage, people forgive personal differences and work towards the

achievement of the common goal of the group. Co-authors that participated in the simulation

reported an increased willingness to listen and use divergent views in negotiation and, as a result,

reach consensus on the negotiation tactics. This is a critical stage in group development since it

results in group cohesiveness and makes individuals to be more inclined on the work to be done.

Despite that, the team managed to set aside the conflict and get to working more effectively on

their tasks which indicate that the team has progressed to the norming stage.

However, the performing stage, which is different by high-functioning teamwork and the

achievement of the objectives was partially implemented. Although, the team observed

improvement in the level of co-ordination, some residual conflicts negatively affected the

efficiency of the group. Hence, the simulation demonstrated that the team was functioning at the

level of storming and norming and began performing to some extent. This implies that while there

was improvement in the performance, there are still such issues as post conflict fractiousness and

role indeterminacy that hinder performance.

Communication in the Team

Organizational communication plays an important role in keeping an organization as a

team, encouraging people at the workplace and providing resolution to the existing issues (Kinicki

& Breaux Soignet, 2022). Some of the key variables of smooth team work include passing

information that every team member comprehends the goals and objectives, being in agreement

with the strategies, and having the ability to solve some of the conflicts that may arise within the

team. Even in the simulation, lack of communication can be cited as a cause for failure, and

communication can be cited as a factor that made success possible. At the beginning, there was no

well-defined communication structure and as a result, the goal and objectives got misunderstood,

and there was no clarity on the roles that each member of the team was to perform. Some issues

involved in the inter-organizational relations were; the roles of the organizations involved

Communication breakdowns caused by misunderstandings caused by misinterpretations of signals

were evident, and they include misunderstandings of priorities, which commonly resulted in

delayed decision-making. For instance there was normally lack of clarity as to the appropriate

strategic objectives that should be pursued at an early negotiation stage.

In the area of communication there were several barriers such as the use of different modes

of communication and lack of listening to each other. Some of the members were more active in

the discussions while others least were active in the discussions resulting in imbalance in activity.

Some of these barriers include limited access to communications medium and minimal interaction

resulting in lack of a favorable teamwork experience during the first task assignment. Another

limitation which arose from peer-based team structures that were characterized by horizontal

communication was rivalry, competing self-interest, and consequently aggressive bargaining.

Nevertheless, this team was also able to bypass some of these barriers just with daily

communications and more targeted conversations. Acknowledging people’s effort, as well as

developing and implementing the better structure for idea sharing enhanced the communication

processes and thus made the team more productive.

The level of communication throughout the simulation can be said to be moderate in its

efficiency. Although the team tried to enhance dialogue throughout the time, the breakdown of

dialogue at the initial stage deprived the team of precious time. It would have been better if the

team set clearer and more defined roles for each member of the negotiation team and developed

more systematic and prescribed way of exchanging information which would have prevented some

of the initial misunderstandings and have improved the flow of the negotiation process.

Functional and Dysfunctional Conflict in the Team

In every team process, there is conflict that can be strong or weak based on how each

process is managed. Functional conflict, constructive conflict, arises when a conflict takes place

and results into emergence of new ideas, better ideas, wider solutions or better decisions (Indeed

Editorial Team, 2020). In contrast, dysfunctional conflict never allows progress, compels tension

and hinders a team’s achievement of its objectives. Each type of conflict was present in the

simulation: task conflict was part of the dynamics that developed within the team and relationships

conflict provided an additional role in the simulation.

The main type of conflict that occurred in the simulation was dysfunctional, especially

before the users were mid-way through the process. Some of the members especially during the

negotiation process had the perception that some of the ideas presented by them were not being

heard or even if heard were not appreciated. At some point this led to frustration and resentment

which did not allow the team to progress further. This form of conflict is expressed in terms of

feelings and individual self-considerations and interests and hence interferes with the achievement

of the group’s goals. Proposed tactics: The tactics were not well received by all the members and

some even resisted against these being implemented, this was a perfect example of dysfunctional

conflict.

However, this dysfunctional conflict over time was replaced with functional conflict when

the team started solving problems in a more constructive manner. This led to the fact that as soon

as members began to listen and introduce different opinions into the collaboration, the team began

to create more sophisticated negotiation strategies. Fierce conflict that is functional in nature can

be beneficial in the evaluation and development of ideas in a group because members are forced to

justify as well as consider other positions. In the simulation, it shifted the gears and came up with

more detailed plan to be adopted by the negotiation team. Hence, through this conflict, the team

was able to realize the positive effects of functional conflict as a way of enhancing the decision

making resolution and even solving problems.

The gain that came from the functional conflict for the team was the establishment of

harsher strategies in negotiation. However it is worthy to highlight that when dysfunctional

conflict arises and is not addressed in the right way it could have negatively affected the entire

team. The tension that was created initially as well as the miscommunication could have grown

deeper by creating divisions in the group and therefore minimizing the possibilities of attaining a

positive result. Thus, despite the conflict turning into a constructive one and fuelling creativity and

invention, dysfunctional aspects of this conflict had to be resolved at the initial stage not to

negatively affect the team’s relationships and dynamics.

Motivational Strategies in the Team

Motivational strategies in the team can be defined as the group of behaviors that give direction,

purpose, and encouragement to the team in order to enhance performance. It will be essential to

understand several motivational theories that can help in the process of effective motivation of the

teams to achieve the required results. I have another template, content/needs theories, process

theories, and reinforcement strategies explores different ways through which motivation can be

achieved in teams. All these theories are quite helpful while analyzing the details of the simulation

in the sense that they provide the blueprint of how the team could have been motivated well.

The content/needs theories are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg’s two factor

theories; these theories suggest that in order to motivate people basic as well as higher-order needs

must be met. In the simulation the team could have been motivated more through the identification

of both the safety and esteem needs of the team members. In particular, the promotion of each

team member’s perceived social inclusion through making them believe that their ideas are being

taken seriously in the course of team projects could have boosted the morale of the teams. This

could have been done by extending the rights of the members to have their way in decision making

processes without any dominance of some of the members. Also, identifying the efforts which

contributed to making progress in the negotiation process would have been helpful in encouraging

the group.

Motive theories of motivation comprise of process theories that emphasize the belief that

effort will be followed by attainment of intended results for example Vroom's expectancy theory.

In the simulation, it would have been beneficial to stress how each participant's work contributed

toward the overall success of the negotiation. That is, the team could have been encouraged by

setting some goals and objectives and explaining to the employees how every single steps made

benefited in achieving those goals. In this manner, the members in the respective teams would

have been motivated to fully participate in the negotiation, since their ideas were appreciated and

directly attributed to affecting the result of the negotiation. Furthermore, in case there were issues

with perceived fairness of how contributions were rewarded, the team would not have developed

the perception of unfairness which stems from it and reduce motivation.

The reinforcement techniques like positive reinforcement emphasize on changing behavior

by encouraging certain behaviors (West Chester University, 2022). In the real-time and also in the

screen shot, it was possible to have used positive reinforcement in order to motivate constructive

output and prevent counterproductive conduct. For instance, it could have rewarded those team

members who provided leadership on the project or those who contributed with solutions that were

creative in some way; in this way, team members would have been publicly commended and this

would have encouraged other team members to do the same.

Conclusion

In my opinion, the “To Strike a Deal” simulation was engaging effective in conveying the

importance of communication, interdependence, and conflict-solvance in negotiations. In specific,

the issue of stages of group formation was discussed and by doing so, along with working on

communication barriers and identifying ways of comprehending and solving emerged conflicts, as

well as using motivational techniques, the team advanced in the defined goals. It is important to

note that the two teams observed major conflict areas like inadequate initial communication,

dysfunctional conflict handling however they showed that with appropriate conflict-solving

mechanisms all these difficulties could be handled. These observations are relevant not only to the

simulation tasks but also in real environment of the organizations, where collaboration and

cooperation remain crucial factors which influence the performance of Activity.

References

Indeed Editorial Team. (2020, November 27). 4 Levels of Conflict and Tips for Managing Them |

Indeed.com. Www.indeed.com. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-

development/levels-of-conflict

Kinicki, A., & Breaux Soignet, D. (2022). Management: A practical introduction. (10th ed.).

Mcgraw-Hill Education.

Scott, H. K., Jain, A., & Cogburn, M. (2022). Behavior Modification. PubMed; StatPearls

Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459285/#:~:text=Thus%2C

%20positive%20reinforcement%20occurs%20when

West Chester University. (2022, September 28). Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development. West

Chester University. https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx

Students also viewed