CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

440 CARNEVALE
discussion of escalation (chapter 8, this volume); for example, the important
study by Mikolic, Parker, and Pruitt (1997) showed clearly the temporal
dynamic of conflict processes, and further shows that some effects,
such as gender, change across time. Olson-Buchanan and Boswell (chapter
11, this volume) made the same point about time in their call for moving
the field forward, in noting that disputing in organizations is a recursive
process “whereby prior experiences with an ODR system have implications
for later dispute situations and resolution” (pp. 340–341). The same point
can be made about pattern bargaining (Friedman, Hunter, & Chen, chapter
12, this volume). Henderson, Trope, and Carnevale (2006) reported that
time perspective can organize cognitive processes in negotiation.
In an interesting analysis of organizational mergers, Terry and Amiot
(chapter 13, this volume) also highlighted the importance of time: They
focus on developmental processes and the emergence of novel social identities,
as a three-stage process, that can facilitate resolution of conflict.
Interestingly, Kelman (1999) made a similar point about emerging identities
and conflict resolution in the Middle East.
There also are interesting context questions that can be raised. In
their impressive review and work on groups in negotiation, Beersma et
al. (chapter 4, this volume) showed that dispositional variables, such as
social value orientation, could play an important role in conflict behavior.
One way to extend this work is to look at groups in context. For example,
Probst, Carnevale, and Triandis (1999) showed that the most competitive
individuals in a group would become the most cooperative in their group
when their group is in competition with another group. Will they also be
the first to leave their group if their group is losing the between group
competition?
The important role of the broader context of disputes is also seen at a
macrolevel in the changes that have affected U.S. labor. Friedman et al.
(chapter 12, this volume) note the broad changes in the environment that
affect the way labor and management negotiate, for example, the advent
of global competition.
One thing that is largely absent from the literature is the top-down
effects of conflict in networked relationships in organizations. A nice story
from the early days of research makes the point: the first attempt to get
intergroup conflict by Sherif, for the Robbers Cave studies, failed.
But briefly, this happened before the Robbers Cave experiment, in the summer
of 1953. In an earlier study, Sherif showed that he could produce hostile
attitudes (in groups that were formed to cut across earlier established friendships)
by introducing competing goals. The 1953 study was designed to test
the next step, showing that these hostile attitudes could be overcome through
superordinate goals. But this time around he was not able to produce the
initial hostility, even though he tried hard (and in questionable ways) to do
so. He considered the whole exercise a failure, since he was not able to create
the conditions that would allow him to test his hypothesis. He was not inter-