First I would like to define what is a conflict? A conflict is a process that is started when one party or group perceives that another party or group has negatively affected, or is about to, something that the first party or group cares about. This can span to a wide range of possible conflicts that people experience when they are part of an organization. Some examples are differences over interpretations of facts, incompatibility of goals, or disagreements based on behavioral expectations. Traditionally, most people believe that all conflicts are harmful and must be avoided. This is normally caused by lack of communication, lack of openness, or failure to respond to employee needs. When human relations look at conflict they see it as a natural and inevitable outcome in any group. Interactionist think that conflict is not only a positive force in a group but it’s absolutely needed in order to perform effectively. You can look at conflicts as an iceberg. When you first come upon one you only see the issues and not everything that is hidden under the conflict. There’s things like mixing personalities, emotions, interest/needs/desires, self-perceptions and self-esteem, hidden expectations and unresolved issues from the past that can be brought up in a conflict. Now the difference between a functional and dysfunctional conflict really depends on how the group performances is effected and weather the organization’s interests are served. When the conflict supports the goals of the group and improves the performance it would be a functional one. One the other hand, when it hinders the performance it is considered a dysfunctional conflict. Functional conflicts serves the organization’s interests. These conflicts are commonly referred to as cooperative or constructional conflict. These conflicts also are helpful in obtaining the goals of the group of a group as it aids in several things. It helps with analytical thinking because when there is a conflict the members are identifying several different possibilities to solve the issue. Without the conflict they might not think as creatively. Also the discussing tension among members is another advantage that functional conflicts aids. When the conflict is expressed openly it can help reduce the tension between the members of the group that could otherwise remain suppressed, and when that tension is surprised can cause imaginative distortion of truth, sense of frustration and tension, high mental exaggeration and biased opinions resulting in fear and distrust. This conflict also promotes conflict and with the increase in competition it can turn out more results with more efforts put in. There is also a sense to promote group cohesiveness when there is a functional conflict. Some people think that conflict creates solidarity between members of the party, but it also increases loyalty in the members of the party and inculcates a feeling of group identity as the members compete with the outsiders. With the increased group cohesiveness, it can help management achieve the organizational goals effectively. Functional conflict also aids the fact that you have to face challenges. It tests the abilities of individuals as well as the group as a whole during the conflict. It creates challenges for them and they have to face these challenges where they’ll need to be creative and dynamic. Overcoming these challenges can lead to a search for alternatives to the presents methods used, which results in organizational development. There’s also the possibility for organizational change. When people are faced with a conflict, there is a change in attitudes and there are ready for the change to meet the requirements of the situation. The group’s awareness is also increased because the members are aware of the other members involved in the problem and the methods adopted to solve the problem. The quality of decisions are high quality because the members express opposing views and perspectives that