Search results

This study aims to investigate the relationship between personality, gender and interpersonal peacemaking. Peacemaking is considered as voluntary behavior of team members to help conflicting peers in an impartial way, to find an amicable solution. This study tests the relation between the Big Five personality dimensions, gender and five different components of interpersonal peacemaking (general involvement in peacemaking, multipartiality, focus of finding solutions, emotional support and the use of humor).

In total, 503 participants filled out a survey assessing their personality and peacemaking behavior at work. To test the hypotheses, this study conducted structural equation modeling in AMOS 22.0.

In line with expectations, openness, extraversion and agreeableness related positively to most peacemaking components, while conscientiousness and neuroticism related negatively to the use of humor and peacemakers’ multipartiality, respectively; comparing men and women, women engage more often in peacemaking in general and in emotional support, and use less humor than men. Results also showed that these gender differences are partially mediated by agreeableness being higher for women.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first studies exploring the relationship between personality (Big Five), gender and different aspects of interpersonal peacemaking. Peacemaking is an important, however understudied, behavior in teams and part of OCB. The promotion of peacemaking contributes to team effectiveness.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relations between peacemaking at work and peacemaking at home. Peacemaking is defined as voluntarily helping behavior in interpersonal conflict, by a person who has no formal authority over the conflicting parties, acts impartial and works with either one or more parties to solve the conflict constructively (Zhang et al., 2018).

In total, 639 participants engaged in a survey to measure their peacemaking behavior at work and at home. First, the peacemaking scale is validated using factor analysis. To test the hypotheses regression analysis is conducted.

Results show that peacemaking at work and at home are positively-related. Further, compared to peacemaking at work, people tend to be more often engaged in peacemaking at home; are more focused on settling the issues, provide more emotional support and use more humor, however, are less multi-partial.

Although based on self-reports, the results regarding the positive relation between peacemaking at work and at home may be enlightening in human resource management such as personnel selection.

The study provides the first theory-based instrument to measure peacemaking as informal helping behavior in interpersonal conflict, at work and at home. Five components are measured, namely, peacemaking in general, multi-partiality, settlement-oriented, emotion-oriented and humorous peacemaking behaviors.

The present study investigates the relationship between servant and authoritarian leadership, and leaders’ third-party conflict behaviors in followers’ conflicts, thereby contributing to integrating knowledge on leadership styles and leaders’ third-party conflict behaviors. This study aims to investigate leadership and conflict management in a context hardly studied: local religious communities or convents within a female religious organization.

The authors collected quantitative survey data from 453 religious sisters, measuring their perception of leaders’ behaviors. These religious sisters live in local religious communities within a Catholic Women Religious Institute based in Nigeria (West Africa) and in other countries across the globe.

Results show that servant leadership relates positively to leaders’ third-party problem-solving behavior and negatively to leaders’ avoiding and forcing. Moreover, authoritarian leadership relates positively to leaders’ third-party avoiding and forcing behaviors.

This study expands theory development and practices on leadership and leaders’ third-party conflict behaviors. The authors associate servant and authoritarian leadership with leaders’ third-party conflict behaviors: avoiding, forcing and problem-solving, in followers’ conflicts. The authors offer practical recommendations for religious leaders on servant leadership and leaders’ third-party conflict behaviors.