Construction Project Management

A. Conflict Resolution Styles of Project Manager

Project managers should manage conflicts effectively otherwise relationships between project participants will deteriorate and project goals will be impossible to be achieved (Zikmann, 1992).

According to Rahim (1992) and Bushyacharu (1996), there are five styles to manage conflict: Avoidance, this style may take form in postponing an issue until a better time or withdrawing from a threatening situation. Avoiders usually refuse to acknowledge that a conflict exists and prefer to retreat from potential conflicts; Dominating, this style has been identified with forcing behavior to win one’s position. A dominating person goes all out to win his or her objectives and often ignores the needs of others; Accommodating, this style is trying to create a sense of harmony. A person with this style neglects his or her own concern to satisfy the concern of the other party; Compromising, this involves give-and-take whereby both parties give up something to attain a mutually acceptable agreement. Solutions bring some degrees of satisfaction to the conflicting parties so that no one totally win or lose; and Collaborative, this is a result-oriented style. People solve a problem and seek a practical solution so everyone gains as a result. Everyone works through their disagreement to find a solution that will satisfy their basic concerns. This style requires openness, exchange information, and examination of differences between the parties.

Research showed that collaborative style tends to work better than others because it yields win-win situation (Bushyacharu, 1996).

B. Affects of Emotional Intelligence to Conflict Resolution Styles of Project Manager

Table 1: Conflict Resolution Styles of Respondents (classification by EI score)

* = Different at 5% level of significance

Likert Scale: 1 Never, 2 Rarely, 3 Sometimes, 4 Often, 5 Always

Table 1 shows that project managers with higher EI scores tend to use more accommodating and collaborative styles than respondents with lower EI scores. Goleman (1998) argued that EI makes a person more accommodating, which promotes harmony and can bring positive impact to the organization (Goleman et al., 2002).

Project managers with higher EI tend to collaborate more than project managers with lower EI. Bushyacharu (1996) explained that collaborative style tends to work better because it creates a win-win situation. In addition, Goleman stated that an emotionally intelligent person will try to achieve a win-win situation (Goleman, 1998; 2001; Goleman et al., 2002).

The table also provides other indicators related with conflict resolution style in terms of avoidance of conflict, dominating of conflict resolution, and compromising, although they are not statistically significant. Project managers with higher EI tend to avoid conflict and compromise the conflict resolution process. However, project managers with lower EI tend to dominate the process.

Further analysis is to investigate the relationship of EI dimensions with conflict resolution styles. Spearman’s rho is used to find out the correlation coefficient between EI dimensions and conflict resolution styles. Table 2 shows significant positive correlations between some EI dimensions and some conflict resolution styles. 

Table 2: Correlations between Conflict Resolution Styles and Dimensions of EI

* = Correlation is significant at 0.05 level (2-tailed)

First correlation is between avoidance style and relationship management. In his classic book, Carnegie (1981) said that the only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it. He said that a person cannot win an argument because his or her triumph will make others feel inferior and resent the triumph. This is one of principles for winning people to your way of thinking. Therefore, this result supports the old theory that people use avoidance style to manage relationship with others.

Second one is between accommodation with self awareness and social awareness. Accommodation tries to promote harmony and focuses on the emotional needs of employees (Goleman et al., 2002). Social awareness means has sensitivity to others and understand the need of others. Therefore, accommodation and social awareness are related. In addition, self awareness relates with accommodation because in order to create harmony with others, it is important to understand how self behavior impacts others (TalentSmart, 2004).

Last correlation is between collaborative style and social awareness. Collaborative tends to reach consensus and finds suggestions and solutions from other competent people (Goleman et al., 2002). Social awareness makes people understand others and can combine their viewpoint with others and in the end, satisfied both needs (Goleman, 2001). Therefore, it explains the relationship between collaborative and social awareness.

In addition, there is a correlation between collaborative style and overall emotional intelligence. This fact indicates further that emotionally intelligent people will resolve conflict in win-win situation.

C. References

Bushyacharu, S. (1996). “Conflict and Conflict Management in Joint Ventures: The Thai Partner Perspectives”. Asian Institute of Technology Research Study, No. SM – 96 – 50, April.

Rahim, M. A. (1992). “Managing Conflict in Organizations”. Construction Conflict Management and Resolution, edited by Fenn, P. and Gameson, R. E & FN Spon.

TalentSmart, Inc. (2004). Emotional Intelligence Appraisal. TalentSmart.com.

Zikmann, R. V. (1992). “Successful Conflict Management”. Construction Conflict Management and Resolution, edited by Fenn, P. and Gameson, R. E & FN Spon.