Study 1 identified three distinct harmony factors in Hong Kong: disintegration avoidance, harmony enhancement, and harmony as hindrance. Furthermore, disintegration avoidance was found to relate positively to conflict avoidance and negatively to negotiation in a conflict situation. Study 2 examined how the harmony factors were related to various conflict styles in China and Australia. The three harmony factors were identifiable in Australia, but the Chinese scored higher in both disintegration avoidance and harmony enhancement. For the two groups, disintegration avoidance was related positively to avoiding and dominating and negatively to integrating, whereas harmony enhancement was related positively to compromising and integrating. Compromising was related more strongly to harmony enhancement than to disintegration avoidance. Finally, disintegration avoidance was positively related to compromising and obliging for Chinese but not for Australians. The study extends the current conflict management research by incorporating the Chinese notion of harmony.

Ting‐Toomey's (1988) face‐negotiation theory of conflict predicts that choice of conflict style is closely associated with face‐negotiation needs, which vary across cultures. This study investigated this prediction in a workplace setting involving status and face‐concern with a sample of 163 Anglo‐Australian and 133 Chinese university students who were working full or part‐time. The association of type of communication (direct or cautious) according to type of face‐threat (self or other) and work status (subordinate, co‐worker or superior) with preferences for three conflict management styles (control, solution‐oriented, non‐confrontational) was examined for the two cultural groups. The results showed that: (1) as predicted by the individualist‐collectivist dimension, Anglo respondents rated assertive conflict styles higher and the non‐confrontational style lower than their Chinese counterparts; (2) overall, both Anglo and Chinese respondents preferred more direct communication strategies when self‐face was threatened compared with other‐face threat; (3) status moderated responses to self and other‐face threat for both Anglos and Chinese; (4) face‐threat was related to assertive and diplomatic conflict styles for Anglos and passive and solution‐oriented styles for Chinese. Support was shown for Ting‐Toomey's theory; however the results indicated that, in applied settings, simple predictions based on only cultural dichotomies might have reduced power due to workplace role perceptions having some influence. The findings were discussed in relation to areas of convergence and the two cultural groups; widening the definition of “face”; and providing a more flexible model of conflict management incorporating both Eastern and Western perspectives.

No abstract

No abstract

This study investigated differences between people from Western and Chinese cultures on perceived competence (effectiveness and appropriateness) of the other party's communication during conflict. First, a pilot study with 30 employees in Singapore examined appraisals of communication competence in recalled intercultural conflict incidents. Western expatriates judged competence of the other party mainly on whether the communication style was direct and engaged, deemed to be judgments of effectiveness. However, host-nationals judged competence mainly on interactional skills and cultural knowledge, deemed to be judgments of appropriateness. Following the pilot study, a quasi-experimental study (128 Australian and 108 Chinese university students) showed that Australians discriminated between four different types of conflict styles more distinctly with effectiveness than appropriateness judgments and vice versa for Chinese. This supports the pilot work. Furthermore, both effectiveness and appropriateness judgments predicted relationship outcomes postconflict for both groups. For Australians, the trend of effectiveness judgments across the four conflict styles paralleled exactly the trend of their predictions for how much the relationship would improve postconflict, whereas their appropriateness judgments did not. For Chinese, neither competency judgments mirrored predictions on relationship improvement. However, their appropriateness judgments paralleled their predictions for level of status quo maintenance, but their effectiveness judgments did not. The evidence supports the hypothesis that people from different cultures hold dissimilar implicit cognitive theories of what defines in/competent communication in interpersonal conflict. The potent association of competency judgments with relational outcomes signals a new cognitive direction for conflict research, long fixated on behavioral manifestations. Brew et al. 857Interpersonal disagreements are a mundane and unpleasant part of everyday interactions. The conflict process is inevitably negotiated and defined through communication, which is capable of escalating or defusing the situation. A commonly held assumption is that communication is essential to the human condition and that its complexity is one of the key aspects that differentiates us from lower order primates. This leads people to believe that, regardless of language differences, communication patterns and uses are shared fundamentals across cultures. However, effective communication, defined by the distinguished American scholar Burgoon (1974) as the act of imparting knowledge or making known one's feelings and thoughts in order to achieve certain outcomes, is not necessarily recognized in all cultures. For example, Gao (1998) points out that there is no easy translation into Chinese characters of the English word "communication." She argues that conversational behavior in Chinese culture is traditionally used for enhancing relationships and harmony rather than imparting information. Ting-Toomey et al., 1...