ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT: IS WHAT WE LOOK AT OR THE PERSPECTIVE WE LOOK FROM MORE IMPORTANT?

Abstract

This study examined organizational conflict using two alternative research methods. In Study I qualitative data was raised via interviews on workplace conflicts from 40 faculty members and research assistants employed in a public university. In Study II vignettes of conflict scenarios were presented to participants and data were raised from 170 graduate and doctorate students. Vignettes differed in terms of the perspective it assumed; consisting of the subordinate, manager, and the neutral observer perspective. Participants were asked to report their affective reactions (negative and positive), conflict management style (collaborating, compromising, accomodating, avoiding and competing) and ethical evaluations (employee and manager) with regards to the vignettes. Content analysis of interviews revealed that injustice, differences of opinions and miscommunication were among the most frequently reported themes of conflict. Variance analyses were carried out for the vignette study on the above mentioned dependent variables. Main effect of perspective was found for most of the variables, such that subordinate perspective participants experienced higher levels of negative affect in reponse to the conflict; neutral perspective reported higher levels of the use of compromising strategy while subordinate perspective had significantly higher levels of avoiding, accomodating, and competing. In terms of the ethical evaluations of the subordinate and manager characters of the scenarios, each perspective perceived itself as more ethical than the other party. These findings point out the importance of perspective taking and empathy in organizational conflict. Practical implications for conflict resolution are discussed in light of the study findings. Keywords Organizational conflict, qualitative research, business ethics, affect, perspective taking