Confl ict, Confl ict Resolution, and Bullying
In their review of the workplace bullying literature, Hoel et al. (1999) argued for the importance of taking a confl ict perspective on the problem of bullying. They suggested that the dyadic confl ict literature is rich in insights on confl ict development and escalation as well as the various procedures and processes for resolving confl icts. Their belief is premised on an implicit connection between confl ict and bullying where severe bullying is likened to “destructive confl icts going beyond the point of no return” (p. 221). Zapf and Gross (2001) concur, describing bullying situations as “long-lasting and badly managed confl icts” (p. 499). From a workplace aggression perspective, Raver and Barling (2008) have argued that confl ict is the umbrella term and that workplace aggression (of which bullying is a special case) should be considered as a particular form of workplace confl ict.