DISPUTE RESOLUTION PATTERNS AND ORGANIZATIONAL DISPUTE STATES (Research Report)

One of the basic tenets of conflict management is that the way an organization settles its conflicts has a direct impact on the workplace climate, and in particular on the conflict aspect of this climate. The purpose of this study is to explore this claim in three steps. First, using cluster analysis, the study identifies three patterns for resolving disputes within organizations: interest-based resolution, resolution based on regulation, and power-based resolution. Second, using cluster analysis, the study isolates three different states of organizational dispute: a state of harmony, a state of dissonance, and a state of conflict. Lastly, the study evaluates the significant impact that dispute resolution patterns have on organizational dispute states.

Analysis of research data yielded three main results. First, the study identified three styles of dispute resolution patterns: interest-based resolution, resolution based on regulation, and power-based resolution. Analysis then focused on three different organizational dispute states: a harmony state, a dissonance state, and a state of conflict. Finally, the impact of resolution patterns on dispute states was shown to be significant and the degree of impact is therefore sufficiently large to have practical value.

A number of theoretical and practical implications stem from these results. First, the results suggest that Ury, Brett and Goldberg’s (1988) theoretical typology of conflict management approaches may benefit from revision in terms of the rights-based approach. In effect, the results of the empirical approach suggest that no resolution is based solely on rights, but such a resolution pattern consists more of a blend of power and rights. It would be more appropriate to talk of an approach based on power controlled by rules. Second, the cluster analysis of climates of conflict suggests an escalating model of conflict. A harmony state would first be disrupted by the emergence of conflicts of ideas or interests. If these are not reconciled, the climate then degenerates into a state of conflict in which negative emotions and competitive behaviour begin to emerge. Last, cross tabulation of dispute resolution patterns illustrates that, to create and maintain a harmony state at work, in addition to settling problems, it can be strategic to modify an organization’s dispute resolution culture.

Reference: Poitras, J. and A. LeTareau. 2008. Dispute resolution Patterns and Organizational Dispute States. International Journalof Conflict Management, 19 (1), p. 72-87.