CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

11. ORGANIZATIONAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEMS 339
procedures in particular) associates with negative, or at best, neutral consequences
for the individual. Below we discuss a couple of approaches to
ODR suggested in the literature as having potential to maximize various
criteria or goals for such systems (e.g., fairness, participant satisfaction,
and efficiency; Prein, 1987; Sheppard, 1984; Thomas, 1982).
Summary. The two early theoretical approaches, exit-voice-loyalty and
due process (now termed procedural justice) continue to serve as a basis for
understanding the use, effectiveness, and outcomes of ODR systems. A
new theoretical approach, “complementarities,” stresses the role of ODR
systems in complementing other HR systems. On an organizational empirical
level of analysis, there is some evidence that organizations adopt ODR
systems to avoid unionization, yet other research indicates some organizations
adopt ODR systems to enhance positive outcomes such as fairness.
The relation between ODR system usage and effectiveness measures
such as turnover or performance is not clear, due to mixed results or lack
of empirical research. Several procedural justice factors have been shown
to relate to ODR system usage (e.g., credibility and perceptions of the decision
maker). A growing body of literature suggests individual factors play
a key role in which, if any, ODR is used. Relatively little is known about
the consequences of ODR system usage for the individual. While early
research was discouraging in this respect, more recent research suggested
ODR system usage may have neutral consequences for the individual.
MovinG forWarD: the MultioPtion aPProaCh
The practice and research of ODR systems have evolved considerably
over the past century. While virtually all of the early organizational ODR
systems were extremely similar in design (multilevel appeal systems),
today there is a plethora of various ODR system options available (Feuille
& Chachere, 1995). Interestingly, not only is there a variety of ODR systems
across firms, but more and more organizations are implementing a variety
of ODR system alternatives within firms. For example, Colvin’s (2004a)
qualitative study of the manufacturing firm TRW discussed the process
by which the firm adopted two ODR procedures (e.g., peer review and
nonunion arbitration). Colvin’s study revealed that these two procedures
were quite distinct in terms of their development, operation, and usage.
Interestingly, divisions within the company varied in terms of the arbitration
procedure format implemented. As further support of the variety
of ODR alternatives within firms, recent empirical studies (cf. Batt et al.,
2002; Colvin, 2003b) showed that adopting one ODR procedure (e.g., nonunion
arbitration) was positively correlated with the adoption of another
(e.g., peer review); yet, like many HR practices, whether the ODR system is
available for a particular employee’s use may vary by organizational unit
or occupational group.