Page 135 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

Multidisciplinary perspectives on intercultural conflict 113

as an avoidance strategy: diverting a contentious issue to another venue for dis-
cussion. Saft (2004) also found that the ways in which meetings are chaired has
a major impact on conflict behaviour. He analyses two different sets of univer-
sity faculty meetings in Japan, in which arguments were frequent in one set but
rare in the other. Saft demonstrates how the chairpersons’ control and organiz-
ation of turn-taking in the meetings was crucial, in that it either constrained the
expression of opposition or enabled it.
In both of these studies, the researchers demonstrate how conflict can be
avoided through skillful management of meetings. This data thus indicates that
far from being a negative strategy that shows lack of concern both for self and
for other (see Figure 1 above), promoting conflict avoidance can be a very ef-
fective and positive management strategy. This applied linguistic research thus
supports other work in organizational behaviour and cross-cultural psychology
(e.g., De Dreu 1997; Gire and Carmet 1992; Leung et al. 1990; Markus and Ki-
tayama 1991; Morris et al. 1998; Ohbuchi and Takahashi 1994) that maintains
that conflict avoidance in fact can be motivated by a concern (rather than lack of
concern) for others.
Context is important in terms of the choice of strategy (Rahim 1992). A cri-
sis situation may need a dominating strategy, whereas a complex problem may
require an integrating (i.e. problem solving) approach, and a relational issue
may require people to avoid each other for the short term. Holmes and Marra’s
(2004) study of workplace discourse confirmed the impact that context can have
on conflict management tactics. They found the following factors to be import-
ant in influencing leaders’ choices of strategy:
– Type of interaction (e.g., workplace meeting), its level of formality, number
of participants, and so on;
– Workplace culture, including organizational culture and community of prac-
tice culture;
– Importance/seriousness of the issue;
– Leadership style.
In relation to avoidance, they point out that the seriousness of the issue is a
key contextual factor. They found that, in their data, good chairpersons and ef-
fective leaders tended to encourage ‘working through conflict’ when a decision
was serious or when it was an important one, such as one that set a precedent for
subsequent decisions.
Much linguistic research focuses on analysing the detailed linguistic strat-
egies that occur in conflictive discourse, and does not attempt to link them to the
macro styles identified in business and communication studies. For example,
Günthner (2000) analyses the ways in which German participants in a German–
Chinese conversation maximize the expression of dissent, and ways in which
the participants end a confrontational frame. She identifies three strategies in