ABSTRACT
This chapter reviews the literature on conflict management and critically analyzes it from a cultural point of view. Cross-cultural conflict style theorists have accepted Blake and Mouton’s (04) two-dimensional framework without due caution, and they invariably cite that framework as the basis for their own work. Given the general assumption of the desirability of direct confrontation of conflicts, it is not surprising that researchers have conceptualized avoidance styles as reflective of low concern for self as well as for the other. This assumption is taken so much for granted in individualist cultures that it has rarely been stated explicitly. The individualist assumption that overt conflict resolution is better than avoidance has led to a focus on only certain aspects of conflict resolution and has resulted in ignorance about, or misinterpretation of, alternative conflict management styles. The authors propose a framework for explaining why people of different cultural identities tend to approach and manage conflict situations differently. The model suggests that interdependents’ tendency to avoid conflict can be explained by their desire to preserve relational harmony and their motivation to save others’ face. Furthermore, the authors suggest that bicultural individuals are likely to be more flexible and effective than culture-typed individuals (individualist or collectivist) in dealing with conflict situations. The review concludes with suggestions for avenues for future research and some practical implications.
