Organizational Conflict: A Comparative Analysis of Conflict Styles Across Cultures

Abstract

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:463575 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.This study investigated the unpad of culture on styles of handling interpersonal conflicts. The Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory was used to collect data on the conflict management styles of integrating, obliging, avoiding, dominating, and compromising. Two regions of the world were chosen: Middle Eastern countries and states (n = 913) and the United States (n = 144). MANCOVA was used to analyze the data. The results indicate that Arab Middle Eastern executives use more of an integrating and avoiding style in handling interpersonal conflict while U.S. executives use more of an obliging, dominating, and compromising style. Implications of the findings and future research are discussedThe globalization of business means that many managers will increasingly operate in different cultures and, therefore, myths and generalizations are likely to develop among the different business communities (Barratt, 19S9). The variables that most frequently characterize culture are language, religion, GNP per capita, and geographical location (Punnett & Ronen, 1984). Cultural evaluations treat organizations as systems for perpetuating and reinforcing values, beliefs, and norms. Cultural congruence varies over time, perhaps, because values shift or new members bring diversity. Given the diversity of global cultures, it is inevitable that conflicts would arise between individuals, organizations, and nations. Executives who are responsible for managing successful foreign operations must be able to handle this conflict in a productive manner.

"Cultural Values, Emotional Intelligence, and Conflict Handling Styles: A Global Study"

“…Building upon the assumption that individual preferences in general (e.g., Bowles, 1998) and individual preferences of handling conflicts in particular (e.g., Elsayed-EkJiouly & Buda, 1996;Kirkbride, Tang, & Westwood, 1991;Ting-Toomey et al, 1991;Wang, Lin, Chan, & Shi, 2005) are culture specific, we develop hypotheses that link cultural value dimensions to the general tendency that an individual prefers some conflict handling styles over others. In the literature several concepts of culture are present to understand and measure the effect of culture on various outcomes (e.g., Hofstede, 1980;Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010;House et al, 2004;Inglehart, 1997;Schwartz, 1994Schwartz, , 2006Triandis, 1995;Triandis & Gelfand, 1998).…”

Gaya Pengurusan Konflik dan Kesannya Terhadap Institusi Kekeluargaan dalam Novel Saga

“…Elsayed-Ekhouly dan Buda (1996) telah memetik pandangan Rahim yang mengatakan bahawa konflik merupakan proses interaktif yang bercirikan ketidaksesuaian, ketidaksefahaman atau percanggahan antara individu mahupun organisasi. Hal ini selari dengan pandangan Deutsch (1990) yang menyatakan, konflik timbul akibat ketidaksetujuan dan ketidaksesuaian tingkah laku.…”

Conflitos e gestão de conflitos em contexto grupal

“…Farmer e Roth (1998), num estudo exploratório com grupos de trabalho, concluíram que os comportamentos que reflectem uma elevada preocupação com os outros (integração e acomodação) são utilizados com maior frequência do que aqueles que traduzem uma baixa preocupação (evitamento e domínio). Na mesma linha, DeChurch e Marks A integração revela-se também a estratégia mais utilizada nas diferentes culturas, embora as evidências empíricas apontem para a existência de diferenças relativamente à frequência dos estilos de abordagem aos conflitos em função da natureza individualista ou colectivista da sociedade 64 (Elsayed-Ekhouly & Buda, 1996;Kozan, 1997). Ting-Toomey et al (1991) num estudo comparativo entre os Estados Unidos da América, identificados como cultura individualista, e quatro países com cultura colectivista -China, Tailândia, Coreia e Japão -, constataram que os membros das culturas colectivistas estão mais motivados para a satisfação dos interesses da outra parte numa situação de conflito do que os membros das culturas individualistas, o que se traduz num menor recurso a estratégias de competição e numa maior utilização de abordagens de evitamento.…”