Rlchard Pettlnger

Fig. 3.2 Conflict and the Type A behavior pattern. Source: Greenberg, J. and Baron, R.A. (1995) Behavior in Organizations. Prentice Hall International.
Personality type and conflict

As stated above, Type As are much more likely to experience and become involved in con flict (see Figure 3.2).

Subsequent research (Baron, 1987) ¹ conducted in the food industry again found that Type As were much more likely to engage in con flicts with subordinates and peers. There was, however, little difference when it came to engaging in open con flict with superiors. This indicates the following.

EVOLUTION OF STRESS AND STRESS MANAGEMENT 23
» The need for organizations and their managers to pay attention to personality, as well as profession and occupation, in the management of groups. Problems clearly arise when individuals are seen only as highly active, extremely busy or high achievers in terms of their output volume alone. It is necessary to attend to ways of working so that the high levels of commitment, energy, and capability brought by Type As result in excellent performance output without the attendant con flict-induced stress (see Summary box 3.1).

» The need for organizations and their managers to fully understand the costs and bene fits of allowing these ways of working to continue. In terms of individual output, the contribution of Type As is very high. In terms of stress and con flict caused in dealings with others, much of the effectiveness of this contribution is likely to be dissipated in paying for organizational and managerial time, effort, and resources required for the resolution of disputes and grievances in the wake of the progress of the high achiever.

» It also implies an ethical responsibility to ensure that conditions are created so that Type As can work effectively at their professions, occupation or expertise by setting collective standards of attitude, behavior, and performance to which everyone can conform. These are then reinforced with effective performance appraisal that identi- fies organizational and occupational development needs so that Type As are enhanced by directing their energies into productive and effective output only.
These studies are a major contribution to understanding stress at work in that they relate behavior, drives, personality, and occupation. There are also specific management interventions clearly indicated.





24 STRESS MANAGEMENT
This is a problem in public services, and industry and commerce. It indicates that subject teaching and learning in the areas of personality, understanding, management, and self-understanding are required for the effective transformation of excellent profes- sional and occupational achievers into top managers. The present finding is that, because these subjects are not addressed, such persons (especially Type As) tend to rely on the qualities that have got them so far to take them on further still. It is also likely that Type Bs are much more receptive to the fact that the skills, qualities, and expertise that have got them so far will no longer be adequate if there is to be further progress. This has direct implications for training and development for top jobs.

» In public professions such as nursing, teaching, and social services work, frontline work requires the energy, commit- ment, enthusiasm, and dynamism of Type As; but managing, ordering, and directing these professions requires the calm and considered strategy approach of Type Bs. Failure to recognize and understand this means that there are always going to be skills and experience gaps if Type As are promoted.

» In industrial and commercial professions such as sales and marketing, again the frontline is highly results orientated and driven; and again where the strategic approach is required, shortfalls become apparent.

In both cases, the problem is compounded because higher pay and reward levels are almost universally given to managers rather than those at the frontline. Therefore, anyone who needs or wants increased recognition and rewards is pressurized into applying for jobs that they are likely to be unable to do.