Search results

The rapid globalization of modern business and the multicultural nature of its workforce pose major challenges for leadership and human resource management in 1990s. One important area that is yet to be fully explored is the managing of conflict in a multicultural organization where values, orientations, preferences, and attitudes differ significantly among the members. This paper explores the implications of cultural differences for managerial intervention in conflicts between subordinates in organizations using Hofstede's four‐dimensional framework.

This paper seeks to explore the role of ombuds processes on commitment and trust to the organization.

This research is framed by and builds on theories about cooperation‐competition, procedural justice, and third party intervention (ombudsman processes) in managing organizational relationships. Data for this study come from semi‐structured longitudinal interviews with 45 participants (138 interviews total) during active pursuit of a grievance through the ombuds process.

Organizational commitment and trust are fluid processes created through symbolic interaction with organizational actors. Interaction with these actors, over time, influences commitment to the organization.

This study reports on the perspective of the person pursuing the grievance through one ombuds office. Future research should explore perspectives of both parties and in different organizational contexts.

The use of ombuds processes to manage conflicts may restore trust and commitment in the organization. Key to this is the use of processes that demonstrate fair procedures and effective communication by high status organizations actors.

This paper provides new insight into the effects of conflict and conflict management in organizations and is of value to organizational leaders, managers, ombudspersons, and other conflict management specialists.

This study examines the impact of mediator style, mediation outcome, and mediator background variables on community mediation participant satisfaction and fairness perceptions along several dimensions. Our data were collected from a community mediation program located in a justice court in the Southwestern United States. During a twelve‐month period, 40 mediation sessions, each involving a single mediator, were videotaped. The 108 mediation participants completed surveys assessing their perceptions of and satisfaction with their specific mediation experiences. The findings indicate important impacts of mediator facilitativeness on all perceptions and of conflict resolution success on satisfaction. Mediator experience impacted perceptions of the mediator; mediator gender and law background had no impacts.

The purpose of this paper is to obtain insight into court-referred mediation in the Israeli Labor Courts, by analyzing its processes and outcomes, as a function of tactics used by both the disputants and the mediator.

Observation of 103 court-referred mediations, for each of which a detailed process and outcome were documented. Data on disputants' refusal to participate in the mediation was also collected. At the end of each mediation case, disputants were given a questionnaire in which they expressed their satisfaction with the outcome and their evaluation of the mediator's contribution.

A low rate of refusal to participate in court-referred mediation was found. Also, the higher the ratio of soft tactics to pressure tactics employed (by all parties involved) during the process, the higher the rate of agreements. Mediators use significantly more soft tactics than disputants, and are more active in using tactics. The two significant variables that predict the mediation's agreement are the ratio between soft tactics to pressure tactics used by all parties, and mediator contribution to the process.

The significant role of soft tactics in the process, outcome, and satisfaction of court-referred mediation may serve as a guideline for disputants and mediators.

This unique research, which examines the impact of tactics on court-referred mediation, may provide added and significant theoretical insight into its process and outcome, as well as a better understanding of other “hybrid” (compulsory at the beginning, voluntary at the end) mediations.

This research examined the relationships among a number of outcomes of mediation. The sample consisted of 73 hearings at two dispute settlement centers in New York State. Predictions from goal achievement theory were contrasted with predictions from procedural justice theory. In accordance with goal achievement theory, disputants who attained their goals in the agreement indicated immediate satisfaction with that agreement and with the conduct of the hearing. However, goal achievement was unrelated to long‐run success or long‐run satisfaction with the agreement, a result which may apply primarily to the mediation of interpersonal disputes. The predictions from procedural justice theory were more successful. Disputants who perceived that the underlying problems had been aired, that the mediator had understood what they said and that they had received a fair hearing also showed immediate satisfaction with the agreement and with the conduct of the hearing. In addition, these and related perceptions—especially in the eyes of the respondent—were predictive of several aspects of long‐run success.

Although different facets of managerial third‐party intervention in organizations have been explored, we know little about how managers should intervene in different disputes for resolving them successfully. In this study, a prescriptive model of intervention strategy selection proposed by Elangovan (1995) is tested. Data on successful and unsuccessful interventions were collected from senior managers in different organizations. The results show that following the prescriptions of the model leads to a significant increase in the likelihood that an intervention would be successful as well as in the degree of success of the intervention, thereby supporting a contingency view of dispute intervention.

In a simulated three‐issue organizational dispute, subjects were interrupted by a third party (their supervisor) who recommended—and eventually imposed—one of five different outcomes. Each outcome provided subjects the same overall payoff, though the arrangement of payoffs across each of the three issues varied. The design allowed us to evaluate four different perspectives regarding negotiators' perceptions of their outcomes. In addition, third parties provided justifications, apologies, or excuses for their actions. Fairness judgments and supervisory evaluations were most favorable when negotiators received an outcome reflecting favorable settlements on the majority of the issues, or the midpoint compromise; the least favorable reactions occurred when subjects received favorable outcomes on only their most important issue. Third parties who offered a justification for their actions were seen as fairer than those offering apologies or excuses. The findings reiterate the importance of considering both the symbolic characteristics of outcomes and the interactional justice inherent in different types of explanations.

The purpose of this paper is to select the best model among alternative models explaining the relationship maintenance in mediation.

Four alternative models are employed in order to select best fit model through the test of each construct using Korean and Indonesian firm data.

The settlement model out of four alternative models is the best fit model in both Korea and Indonesia. The nexus of experience-settlement is not similar between Korea and Indonesia. The nexus of cost-saving-settlement is similar between two countries.

The field manager and policy maker get useful information from the findings. In particular, Korea and Indonesia belong to different cultural clusters.

This study contributes to the mediation literature through the suggestion of hypothesized model of relationship maintenance intention in mediation.

The purpose of the paper is to provide a quantitative analysis of existing research comparing perceptions about male and female mediators to understand better the extent a mediator's gender is related to the disputing individuals' view of the mediation.

Several databases were searched extensively (1967‐2007) for relevant research studies and articles reporting disputant perceptions and mediator gender. Unpublished research was solicited from dissertations, the internet, as well as directly from authors. Articles were screened; those meeting predetermined criteria were included in the meta‐analysis.

Existing studies indicated that male mediators were perceived more favorably than their female counterparts were.

Despite a very extensive search of existing studies, only five contained the information necessary for this meta‐analytic review.

The results suggest that additional barriers and challenges exist for women, compared to men, in the world of mediation. Considering both the significant results and the lack of existing research on the topic, further research is clearly needed for more definitive advice regarding the training and practice of mediation.

Current textbooks and research on mediation have extremely limited or no information on the role of the gender of the mediators. While gender differences have been researched in regards to negotiation and negotiators, this paper systematically considers perceptions about male and female mediators.

The intent of the research reported in this paper was to add to our understanding of the factors which affect a participant's beliefs concerning whether he/she has been fairly treated within a dispute mediation. A study was conducted using role‐play mediations involving peer‐mediators with undergraduate students posing as roommates experiencing a conflict. Approximately 2 weeks after the mediations, 25 of the disputant‐subjects met with one of the researchers to review a video tape of their particular mediation and discuss the communication which occurred The results of those interviews are presented and discussed in terms of their implications for procedural justice theory and the conduct of interpersonal dispute mediations.