Page 329 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

312 Chapter 11

may disagree openly with close friends. In conflicts of interest, Japanese have no
problem being confrontive and dominant with acquaintances.
Conflict is difficult enough to handle when the parties are from the same culture.
When parties represent different cultures, including co-cultures such as race, ethnic-
ity, gender, and age, the difficulties multiply. We urge you to wade into intercultural
conflict waters carefully and with forethought.
No matter how skilled and ethical group members are at expressing disagree-
ment, they can still crash on the rocks of conflict if their procedures for handling
conflict are poor. We next describe the principled negotiation procedure for managing
conflict, then present five techniques if negotiation procedures fail.

Recap: A Quick Review

eneral patterns of behaviors used to manage conflict can be categorized into five
Gconflict styles, with their related tactics. Effective conflict management can emerge
out of the ethical expression of disagreement.
1. The avoidance style is passive and nonconfrontational. The tactics of denial, topic
changes, and irreverent remarks are especially detrimental to a task group with little
time to solve the problem but may be useful in long-standing groups.
2. The accommodation style is another passive style that is highly appeasing.
Captured in tactics such as giving in and disengagement, it can be effective
and even appropriate when dealing with certain affective conflicts or when the
relationship is more important than fighting over a task issue.
3. Competition is highly confrontational and uncooperative and involves tactics such
as hostile remarks and rejection. It may be effective in short-term task groups
or when a member feels strongly about his or her positions; however, it rarely is
judged appropriate because it harms the socioemotional dimensions of groups.
4. Collaboration is highly integrative, cooperative, and solution centered. It involves a
win–win ethic and is expressed in analytical and conciliatory tactics. It is most consist-
ently perceived as effective and appropriate by members, but takes time and effort.
5. Compromise is a moderate style also called shared outcome. It is captured in tradeoff
tactics that are more appropriate when integrative approaches are not possible.
6. Collaborative, integrative conflict styles are generally favored by both the researchers
and group members. However, the contingencies of the situation should guide both
the anticipated effectiveness and appropriateness of any conflict style and its tactics.
7. Disagreement should be expressed. Follow an integrative path; stay focused;
consider your own needs and those of others; use evidence and reasoning; refute
the idea, not the person offering the idea; and in the face of distributive tactics stay
calm and do not reciprocate in kind.
8. Other cultures handle conflict differently from how people in the United States
handle it. Individualistic and low-context cultures tend to be more direct, openly
expressive, and concerned with self-face. Collectivist and high-context cultures
value harmony and indirect, subtle expressions of conflict; they are more concerned
with saving the other’s face.

gal37018_ch11_291_320.indd 312 3/28/18 12:38 PM