The Handbook of Conflict Resolution (3rd ed)

by Peter T Coleman

  LEADERSHIP IN A HIERARCHICAL SOCIETY

  Although leaders not only have conflict with employees, they often get involved in resolving conflicts between employees and departments. However, conflict management research has not been brought to bear much in the study of leadership. This section reviews research using Deutsch’s theory to understand leadership strategies and effectiveness in China and to show that leaders in China who manage conflict cooperatively can provide direction to get things done and strengthen their relationships.

  A persistent Western stereotype is that Chinese leadership is autocratic: followers quickly and automatically follow the wishes and decisions of leaders. Consistent with this image of power distance, Chinese employees have been found to accept unilateral decision making and prefer their leaders to be benevolent autocrats (Leung, 1997). Whereas superior power in the West is often associated with domination and authoritarianism, leaders in China are expected to be supportive and nurturing (Spencer-Oatey, 1997).

  Our research challenges Western stereotypes and indicates that effective leaders in China must develop an open, mutual relationship with employees (Chen and Tjosvold, in press; Liu, Tjosvold, and Yu, 2004; Tjosvold, Hui, and Su, 2004; Tjosvold and Leung, 2004; Tjosvold, Wong, and Hui, 2004). Authority cannot be assumed; leaders must earn it by demonstrating a commitment to employees and openness to them. Strong cooperative goals were found to be critical for a high-quality leader relationship, and this relationship in turn led to employees being effective organizational citizens (Tjosvold, Law, and Hui, 1996). An open discussion of opposing views between leaders and employees was highly crucial, resulting in productive work, strong work relationships, experiencing the leader as democratic, and believing that both the leader and employee are powerful (Tjosvold, Hui, and Law, 1998). Hong Kong senior accounting managers were able to lead employees working on the mainland when they had cooperative goals, but not when their goals were competitive or independent (Tjosvold and Moy, 1998).

  Democratic, open-minded leadership is valued in China; Chinese employees want a cooperative relationship with their leaders. Although they are hesitant to initiate conflictful discussions, they expect their leaders to consider their needs and views. Despite power distance values, cooperative conflict is a concrete way for managers in China to develop the leader relationship and demonstrate their openness. Cooperative conflict is an ideal that both managers and employees in China and in the West can aspire to.

  DEVELOPING THE THEORY THROUGH RESEARCH IN CHINA

  Studying conflict in different cultural contexts can challenge and refine understandings of cooperative and competitive conflict management. Our research in China has not capitalized much on this possibility, but there are worthwhile possibilities. Research in China has the potential to deepen our understanding of conflict and the theory of cooperation and competition.

  Antecedents to Cooperative Goals

  Chinese society has a unique relation system, guanxi, where personal connections are central to work. Maintaining good relations is a key job motivator and ingredient for success. Particularistic ties—coming from the same village, attendance at the same school, and prior connections between fathers—all can build guanxi.

  Research on guanxi may illuminate how cooperative goals evolve. Guanxi bases may be prima facie evidence that the partners are on the same side with cooperative goals, and these beliefs of cooperative interdependence in turn leads to mutual trust and assistance (Y. Chen and Tjosvold, 2007; Y. Chen et al., 2008a; Y. Chen, Tjosvold, and Wu, 2008b; Wong and Tjosvold, 2010). Guanxi bases, however, do not inevitably result in mutual relationships. Perhaps the development of competitive goals between partners can explain the failure to capitalize on guanxi bases. At present, it is unclear how guanxi may facilitate or hinder the development of cooperative goals. Studies could also explore the extent to which Westerners have similar relational ties that help them develop strongly cooperative relationships.

  Research in China has begun to suggest conditions conducive to the formation of cooperative goals. Confirmation of face, implicit communication to convey warmth, benevolent and participative leadership, and in-group relationships and guanxi may convince Chinese people that their goals are cooperative. These conditions may also promote cooperative goals among Westerners.

  Approaches to harmony may affect goal interdependence in China (Leung, 1997; Leung et al., 2002, 2011). Harmony enhancement—the desire to engage in behaviors that strengthen relationships—is solid and involves feelings of intimacy, closeness, trust, and compatible and mutually beneficial behaviors, whereas disintegration avoidance—a tendency to avoid actions that will strain a relationship—involves differences in values and interpersonal styles and the avoidance of disagreement and conflict. Research can explore the hypothesis that harmony enhancement induces cooperative goals and constructive controversy whereas disintegration motives develop competitive goals and close-mindedness.

  Competition and Conflict Avoidance

  Research is needed on the conditions under which competitive goals and alternative approaches to cooperative conflict are useful in Chinese culture. One study suggests that competition can be constructive in China when competitors already have a quality interpersonal relationship (Tjosvold, Johnson, and Sun, 2006). China should be a fertile context to study when and how conflicts can be avoided (Peng and Tjosvold, 2011). Cooperative interpersonal relationships were found to be important to effective conflict avoidance (Tjosvold and Sun, 2002). Cooperative goals appear to be foundations for constructive competition and conflict avoidance.

  Responsiveness to Goal Interdependence

  A potential cultural difference is that Chinese people, as highly relationship oriented, may be particularly responsive to goal interdependence differences. They are flexible and responsive to the situation, and hence they may be very conscious of the goal relationship they have with others. In-group members are allies worthy of trust; out-group members are suspect. Leung (1988) found that, compared to Americans, Chinese were more likely to pursue conflict with a stranger and less likely to pursue conflict with a friend.

  In North America, independent goals have an impact on dynamics and outcomes similar to but not as powerful as competition. However, in some field studies in China, interactions characterized by independent goals have been more powerful and destructive than those characterized by competition (Tjosvold, 1998; Tjosvold and Poon, 1998). It can be speculated that Chinese people are particularly suspicious and closed-minded toward persons with whom they are not involved. They may find the lack of relationship implied by independent goals more highly disruptive of effective collaborative work than competition.

  Becoming a Cooperative Conflict Team

  Studies reviewed indicate that learning how to resolve conflicts cooperatively helps managers and employees build teamwork and strengthen supply chain and other partnerships that cross organizational boundaries. But how can individuals, teams, and organizations become committed and skilled at managing conflict cooperatively?

  Research on cooperation and competition, as well as training research, indicates that employees need to be motivated and knowledgeable of the target ideas and behaviors, actively participate in the training, be trained as a cohort, and engage in ongoing development and feedback for effective training (Johnson, Druckman, and Dansereau, 1994). In addition, cooperative goals have been found to facilitate learning and application to a wide range of training objectives, including learning teamwork.

  Cooperative goals should be strengthened over time and supported by ongoing feedback. Unresolved disputes, promotion opportunities, ineffective interaction, and many other developments may lead team members to emphasize that their goals are negatively or independently related. Competition and independence are both possible and, at times, highly appealing alternatives.

  A major advantage of cooperative team training is that the use of cooperative groups can facilitate training goals (Johnson et al., 1994). Team members become m
ore knowledgeable and skilled in working cooperatively through team training and follow-up activities. The method of cooperative team training reinforces the message. Cooperative experiences also can improve feedback processes that stimulate learning. Chinese people have been found to be more accepting, open, and respectful of feedback when they are working cooperatively rather than competitively (Tjosvold, Tang, and West, 2004).

  A combined consideration of training and cooperation and competition research suggests the following features for cooperative conflict training. Members from interdependent teams

  Form cooperative learning teams to understand the theory and review the research to appreciate the value for them and their organization of strengthening cooperative goals and managing conflicts for mutual benefit. They learn how to reinforce cooperative goals and reduce competitive and independent ones.

  Use cooperative conflict to discuss and decide whether they want to invest in developing cooperative teamwork.

  Participate in follow-up activities after workshops to assess and receive feedback on their teamwork within and between groups and develop concrete ways to strengthen them.

  Commit themselves to ongoing development of their cooperative teamwork.

  Cooperative team workshop and two-month follow-up of team feedback and development followed these four steps to train teams in a high-technology company based in Beijing (Lu, Tjosvold, and Shi, 2010). Over 150 employees from all the teams in the company participated in the workshop and follow-up activities. Overall, the results support that the theory of cooperation and competition not only can identify conditions and dynamics by which teams can effectively contribute to their organization, but also provide a basis on which teams can strengthen their internal functioning, collaboration among teams, and their contributions to their organization. In particular, the study indicates that cooperative teamwork training can heighten beliefs that goals are positively related, foster constructive controversy and creative processes across teams as well as within them, and enhance group productivity and potency.

  Call center employees in Guiyang, China, formed teams that developed cooperative goals and open discussion of differences. Results after two months indicated they felt more interdependent and involved and turnover had fallen (Tjosvold et al., 2012). They also performed their individual tasks much more effectively, resulting in over 50 percent fewer complaints and nearly 40 percent increase in phones answered on time.

  These studies validate that the theory of cooperation and competition can be applied to strengthen teamwork in China. They also suggest that developing a cooperative conflict team is a practical investment that pays off for organizations and employees.

  Cooperative Conflict for Cross-Cultural Teamwork

  Can cooperative conflict be a common platform for people from diverse cultures? This section argues that cooperative conflict has this potential, but more research, especially in Africa and the Middle East, is needed to demonstrate how diverse culture teams can develop and use cooperative conflict.

  Cross-cultural teams confront many challenges in working together productively. Although research supports the theory of cooperation and competition in China, results do not imply that goal interdependence is operationalized in a highly similar way in the East as in the West (Tjosvold and Hu, 2005). While the “geneotype,” that is, the underlying conceptual structure of the theory, appears to be similar, the “phenotypes,” how the theory is manifested in particular situations, often are not (Leung and Tjosvold, 1998). In particular, the actions that develop cooperative goals or communicate an attempt to discuss conflicts openly may be quite different in China than in North America, as may the general levels of goal interdependence and cooperative conflict. Even if they have common goals and objectives, people from China and the West may have different views of right and wrong, the best ways to accomplish goals, the value of a long-term versus a short-term perspective, appropriate etiquette, and the value of the contributions people make to a joint venture.

  Chinese and Western team members then are likely to confront a great deal of conflict. But this chapter has reviewed research showing that Chinese people as well as Westerners can understand cooperative conflict, agree that this approach is useful, and manage their conflicts cooperatively and constructively. Cooperative conflict is not an imposition of Western culture on Chinese but offers a common approach that they all can use to manage their many conflicts.

  Researchers have called for direct tests of cross-cultural interaction to identify conditions that facilitate how diverse people can work together productively to supplement the traditional focus on documenting differences between cultures (Bond, 2003; Smith, 2003). People from the East and West who rely on cooperative conflict were found to collaborate effectively compared to those who approach conflict competitively or avoid conflict (Y. Chen and Tjosvold, 2005, 2007, in press; Y. Chen et al., 2010; Y. Chen, Tjosvold, and Wu, 2008a, 2008b; Chen et al., 2005a, 2005b; Tjosvold, 1996, 2008; Wong, Tjosvold, and Lee, 1992). These findings directly support that Sino-Western teams can approach their conflicts cooperatively and productively.

  If studies can demonstrate the value of cooperative conflict in Africa and the Middle East as well as continue to be successfully demonstrated in Europe and East Asia (Desivilya et al., 2010; Tjosvold and de Dreu, 1997; Vollmer and Seyr, 2012) as well as India (Bhatnagar and Tjosvold, 2012), Japan, and Korea (Chen et al., 2010; Tjosvold, Cho, Park, Liu, Liu, and Sasaki, 2001; Tjosvold and Sasaki, 1994; Tjosvold, Sasaki, and Moy, 1998), the framework of cooperative conflict has the potential of acting as a common guide for how people from different cultures can develop their own ways of managing conflict.

  Without a common framework, organizations are likely to impose the procedures of one culture on another by, for example, insisting that everyone conforms to the head office’s ways. With cooperative conflict as a common framework, people from several cultures can structure ways of managing conflict cooperatively that are appropriate and effective for them, express their diversity, solve problems and strengthen their relationships.

  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

  The theory of cooperation and competition has performed well in China, with the amount of variance explained comparing favorably with studies in North America. Chinese people distinguish and understand cooperation and competition, and they recognize that they can pursue individual and collective outcomes when they believe their goals are cooperative (X. Chen, Xie, and Chang, 2011).

  Conflict research in China questions the unidimensionality of collectivism-individualism. Individuals can be highly committed to the collective with strong cooperative goals, but this does not assume a lack of individuality. Indeed, a cooperative, collective commitment has been found to promote the open expression of individual opinions and needs. A strong cooperative team fosters outspoken, assertive, and confident individuals; an effective cooperative team depends on members’ willingness to express their individuality (Tjosvold, 1991, 2002; Tjosvold, Chen, and Liu, 2003). Individuals can be both self-assertive and team oriented; cooperative goals encourage both.

  Although a theory developed in the West has guided our research, the resulting studies have exposed Western stereotypes of China. In contrast to the ideas that Chinese consider conflict anathema and inevitably deal with open conflict competitively, Chinese people were found to welcome open discussion of opposing views and to use conflict to explore opposing views and integrate them, especially when they had cooperative goals.

  Chinese values on social face, persuasion, and nonverbal communication need not imply conflict avoidance. These values, when constructively expressed, contribute to open cooperative conflict management. Organizational values in China support developing effective, two-way relationships among leaders and employees. Chinese leaders are more effective and appreciated when they seek the views of employees and develop cooperative relationships with them. Participative management requires that leaders be responsive and open; cooperative conflict contributes
to open, productive relationships between leaders and employees.

  Cooperative conflict was also found to develop teamwork for delivering high-quality, high-value service to customers, a competitive advantage organizations need to survive and flourish in China’s growing market economy (Tjosvold, Chen, and Liu, 2003; Tjosvold and Hu, 2005). Chinese employees who use their conflicts cooperatively have been found to improve the quality of products and services and reduce costs as they strengthen their relationships within their groups and with alliance partners. Ironically, although the theory of cooperation and competition has been developed in the West, it may be particularly applicable to relationship-oriented China.

  Our research on cooperation and competition in China is just a beginning. More work is needed on how Chinese values and settings affect the underlying dynamics of cooperative and competitive interdependence and to modify the theory. Research can usefully explore the ways the theory is operationalized, important antecedents to cooperative goals, and when and how competition and conflict avoidance might be constructive. Research clearly documents that cooperative conflict is a viable, potentially highly constructive approach in China and can be a foundation for productive cross-cultural teamwork.

  Note

  1. The relevance of research findings and evidence for mediation is developed in Tjosvold and Su (2006).

  References

  Bhatnagar, D., & Tjosvold, D. (2012). Leader values for constructive controversy and team effectiveness in India. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, 109–125.