As used here, power-oriented methods include such resolution strategies as forcing, bargaining, and appeasement or acquiescence. Problem-solving methods include integrative decision making and consensus. Labels such as confrontation, collaboration, and creative problem solving refer to the latter methods.
2.
For more detailed discussion, see FilleyA. C., Interpersonal Conflict Resolution (Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foreman and Co., 1975); and ThomasK., “Conflict and Conflict Management,” in DunnetteM., ed., Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1976), pp. 889–935.
3.
MaierN. R. F., Problem Solving Discussions and Conferences: Leadership Methods and Skills (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963).
4.
HarnettD. L.CummingsL. L.HamnerW. C., “Personality, Bargaining Style, and Payoff in Bilateral Monopoly Bargaining Among European Managers,”Sociometry (1973), pp. 325–345.
5.
RenwickP. A., “Perception and Management of Superior-Subordinate Conflict,”Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (1975), pp. 444–456.
6.
Filley, op. cit., pp. 108–109.
7.
BlakeR. R.MoutonJ. S., “The Intergroup Dynamics of Win-Lose Conflict and Problem-Solving Collaboration in Union Management Relations,” in SherifM., ed., Intergroup Relations and Leadership (New York: Wiley, 1962), pp. 94–104; and BurkeR. J., “Methods of Resolving Superior-Subordinate Conflict: The Constructive Use of Subordinate Differences and Disagreements,”Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (1970), pp. 393–411.
8.
BlakeMouton, op. cit.
9.
BlakeR. R.ShepardH. A.MoutonJ. S., Managing Intergroup Conflict in Industry (Houston: Gulf Publishing Co., 1964); and DeutschM.KrauseR. M., “The Effect of Threat Upon Interpersonal Bargaining,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (1960), pp. 181–189.
10.
DeutschKrause, op. cit.; DeutschM., The Resolution of Conflict (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973); Burke, op. cit.; MaierN. R. F., Problem Solving and Creativity in Individuals and Groups (Belmont, Calif.: Brooks-Cole Publishing Co., 1970); VroomV. H.YettonP. W., Leadership and Decision-Making (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1973).
11.
ZandD. E., “Trust and Managerial Problem Solving,”Administrative Science Quarterly (June 1972), pp. 229–239; HaythornW. A.CouchE. H.HaefnerD.LanghamP.CarterL., “The Behavior of Authoritarian and Equalitarian Personalities in Groups,”Human Relations (1956), pp. 57–74; Deutsch, op. cit.
12.
BlakeShepardMouton, op. cit., 1964; JanisI., “Personality Correlates of Susceptibility to Persuasion,”Journal of Personality (1954), pp. 504–518; KagenJ.MussenP. H., “Dependency Themes on the TAT and Group Conformity,”Journal of Consultive Psychology (156), pp. 29–32; CohenA. R., “The Effects of Individual Self-Esteem and Situational Structure on Threat-Oriented Reactions to Power,”dissertation Abstracts (154), pp. 727–728.
13.
HamblinR. L., “Leadership and Crises,”Sociometry (1959), pp. 322–335.
14.
SommerR., Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of Design (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1959).
15.
EvanW. M.MacDougallJ. A., “Interorganizational Conflict: A Labor-Management Bargaining Experiment,”Journal of Conflict Resolution (December 1967), pp. 398–413; LottA. J.LottB. E., “Group Cohesiveness as Interpersonal Attraction: A Review of Relationships with Antecedent and Consequent Variables,”Psychological Bulletin (1964), pp. 259–302.
16.
ShureG. H.MeekerR. J.HansfordE. A., “The Effectiveness of Pacifict Strategies in Bargaining Games,”The Journal of Conflict Resolution (1965), pp. 106–117; RapoportA., “Experiments in Dyadic Conflict and Cooperation,”Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic (1966), pp. 284–291.
17.
Deutsch, op. cit., 1973.
18.
DeutschM., “Conflict and Its Resolution,” in SmithC. G., ed., Conflict Resolution: Contributions of the Behavioral Sciences (Notre Dame University Press, 1971), pp. 36–57.
19.
WaltonR. E.McKersieR. B., “Behavioral Dilemmas in Mixed-Motive Decision Making,”Behavioral Science (1966), pp. 370–384; DruckmanD., “Prenegotiation Experience and Dyadic Conflict Resolution in a Bargaining Situation,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (1968), pp. 367–383; MillerJ.J.BrehmerB.HammondK. R., “Communication and Conflict Reduction: A Cross-Cultural Study,”Journal International de Psychologie (1970), pp. 75–87.
20.
Filley, op. cit., pp. 35–47; WaltonMcKersie, op. cit.
21.
MaierN. R. F.SolemA. R., “Improving Solutions by Turning Choice Situations into Problems,”Personnel Psychology (1962), pp. 151–157; NadlerG., Work Systems Design: The IDEALS Concept (Homewood, Ill.: Irwin, 1967).
22.
Maier, op. cit.; Nadler, op. cit.
23.
HallJ., “Decisions, Decisions, Decisions,”Psychology Today (November 1971), pp. 51–54.
24.
RenwickP. A., “Impact of Topic and Source of Disagreement on Conflict Management,”Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (1975), pp. 416–425.
25.
WaltonR. E.McKersieR. B., A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations: An Analysis of a Social Interaction System (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965). For an example of union training in problem solving, see SternI.PearseR. F., “Collective Bargaining: A Union's Program for Reducing Conflict,”Personnel (May-June 1968), pp. 61–72.
26.
GordonT., Parent Effectiveness Training (New York: Wyden, 1970).
27.
LawrenceP. R.LorschJ. W., Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (Boston, Mass.: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1967); DelbecqA.FilleyA. C., “A Study of the Weather Satellite Program Management and Organizational Systems,” in Multidisciplinary Studies of the Social, Economic, and Political Impact Resulting from Recent Advances in Satellite Meteorology (Space Science and Engineering Center, University of Wisconsin—Madison), Vol. 4, pp. 1–174.
28.
CorwinR. G., “Patterns of Organizational Conflict,”Administrative Science Quarterly (1969), pp. 507–521. For a discussion of possible advantages of conflict, see Thomas, op. cit., p. 891.
29.
Burke, op. cit.; Renwick, op. cit.
30.
Burke, op. cit.
31.
Hall, op. cit, p. 88. For related evidence, see HoffmanL. R.MaierN. R. F., “Quality and Acceptance of Problem Solving Solutions by Members of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Groups,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (March 1962), pp. 401–407.