CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

436 CARNEVALE
processes. However, we also have here important contributions that
reflect state of the art scholarship in the fields of communication, creativity,
organizational diversity, and health, all applied to understanding
organizational conflict. There are two chapters on conflict management
per se, mediation and dispute resolution systems, and chapters on two
contexts of conflict that are particularly relevant to organizations, union–
management conflict and mergers. And the essay on escalation, by Pruitt
(chapter 8, this volume), presents a general model of conflict that is relevant
to conflict no matter what, where, or whom, and an especially nice
thing about escalation models is the focus on when: Time is by definition
a primitive in escalation models. Most models of organizational conflict
are static, absent the dynamic interplay of processes that evolve in time,
a point nicely made by De Dreu and Gelfand (chapter 1, this volume). But
the field is clearly moving toward better treatment of time as a parameter
for modeling, a point I return to below.
It was Ruth (1:16) who gave us “Whither thou goest, I will go,” 2 and
this is also apparent in the study of organizational conflict: The effort
very much reflects the fads and fancies of the broader disciplines that are
brought to bear; whither the disciplines wander—whether it be to cognition,
emotion, cultural analyses, multilevel analysis, decision theory, or
neuroscience models—the study of organization conflict will go as well.
However, it would be a mistake to assume it is a one-way street; for example,
it has taken some time for social psychology and economics to catch
on to the importance of positive factors in human interaction, such as
matters of fairness and respect, something that organization scholars discovered
some time ago in the humanistic reaction to “scientific management,”
illustrated nicely here by Jaffee (chapter 2, this volume). In other
words, one can see the human relations movement in organizations as
having presaged the positive movement in psychology (cf. Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).
In the study of organizational conflict, we are still largely in a taxonomic
phase, with occasional efforts to move to explanation and prediction.
In the study of negotiation, it is more clear, with broad agreement,
that there are basic strategies—contending, concession making, problem
solving—that can lead to agreement. Measures of “concession” or “tradeoff”
are often clear. The comprehensive review by Goldman, Cropanzano,
Stein, and Benson (chapter 10, this volume) indicated that taxonomic work
in mediation has also developed nicely in recent years. And, there has
been some progress on understanding the basic structure of agreement,
although much work lies ahead (cf. Carnevale, 2006).
2 The Bible, King James Version, Book of Ruth, 1:16: And Ruth said, Intreat me not
to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and
where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: 1:17
Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the LORD do so to me, and more
also, if ought but death part thee and me.