CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1     Background to the Study
In the early 1900’s, conflict was seen as an indicator of poor organizational management which needed to be avoided, in the mid 1950’s, it was accepted passively and perceived as normal and expected; manager focused on resolving conflict, while in the 1970’s, conflict was viewed necessary as not good or bad but could be used to promote growth, in the 1990’s, managers needed to confront and manage conflict appropriately (Algert and Watson, 2002). Organisational conflict has historically been viewed as unpleasant, undesirable, something to be avoided by all and sundry (Oseremen and Osemeke, 2015).
Perceptions about conflict changed with the emergence of social systems and open system theory. According to the social system theories, conflict is one of the central forms of interaction. Conflict is normal and positive as well as negative. This view was supported by Emile Durkheim that conflict is normal and functional because it brings about positive changes in an organization. Conflict, however, becomes negative if it is not managed and allows reaching a dysfunctional stage (Ajike, Akinlabi and Magaji, 2015).
When people work and interact together, things do not always turn the way people want it to be. There are always misunderstandings and things do not always go smoothly. Indeed, conflict is an inevitable element of relationships in organizations. Conflict is a natural occurrence in all businesses, may it be a small organization or a big corporation. What makes them only different is how management views and addresses conflicts in their respective organizations (Garcia, 2013).
The role of conflict management in the life of an organization cannot be overemphasized. The establishment and continuous existence of organisation through the realization of its set goals and objectives requires the continuous and effective functioning of its material input with the human element being indispensable. However, the human elements required to facilitate goals attainment often engage in disagreement and variance over factors such as interest, views, style of management among others. The reactionary effect is due to the perceived incompatibilities resulting typically from some form of interference or opposition is term conflict (Obasan, 2011;Mughal and  Khan, 2013).
Conflict in organization is a state of friction caused by the actual or perceived opposition of needs, values and interests between people working together. Conflict takes many forms in organizations. There is the foreseeable clash between formal authority and power and those individuals and groups affected. There are disputes over how revenues should be divided, how the work should be done and how long and hard people should work. There are jurisdictional disagreements among individuals,departments, and between unions and management (Oseremen and Osemeke, 2015).
For people to progress at work and other aspect of life, there must be cooperation which is essential to ensure task attainment and stability in life. However, it would be wrong to reach the conclusion that cooperation is good while conflict is bad, this is because both concepts are pervasive and co-exist in our social life. Industrial conflict is inevitable given the wide range of goals for the different stakeholder in the organization and its absence signifies management emphasizes conformity and stifles innovation (Obasan, 2011).
Esquivel (1997) argued that conflict is unpleasant, undesirable, something to be avoided. On the contrary, Azamosa (2004) countered that conflicts can help strengthened the organisation and enable the organisation to improve its performance. Moreover, Olu and Dupe (2008) submitted that there is growing recognition of the importance of conflict in an organization. Whether in fact conflict is negative or positive to organizational performance is an issue that remained opened to empirical studies.