Suchergebnisse

PurposeRelationship conflict has important negative organizational and personal consequences. However, papers analyzing how to buffer the negative effects of relationship conflict at work-unit level are lacking. This study aims to extend the literature by examining which specific conflict management styles used by work teams (avoiding, integrating and compromising) reduce or increase the link between relationship conflict and collective emotional exhaustion.Design/methodology/approachRegression analysis was conducted using 91 teams (398 employees) from 42 hotels and 42 restaurants.FindingsResults revealed that, as it was expected, relationship conflict was positively related to emotional exhaustion at a team level; this relationship depended on how team members handle relationship conflicts. That is, avoiding and integrating conflict management styles buffered the link between relationship conflict and collective emotional exhaustion, whereas compromising increased this positive link.Research limitations/implicationsOrganizations would include conflict management skills as a requirement for preventing negative consequences of conflict in teams, such as anxiety/depression and bullying.Originality/valueBy considering the unique perspective of team member's shared perceptions of conflict management styles, important implications for the span of influence of collective perception of conflict on well-being have been indicated.

PurposeThe main aim of this study is to analyze the perception of influence tactics used by male and female representatives in order to gain the commitment of their constituencies when accounting for the outcomes reached in a collective bargaining round.Design/methodology/approachAn experimental design was used to manipulate agreement – favorable vs unfavorable – using collective bargaining scenarios, and measurements were made of subjects' perceptions of the use of hard and soft influence tactics and constituency commitment. Participants stated which influence tactics they would use to inform their constituents about a positive or negative agreement, and the level of commitment they would expect from their constituency.FindingsResults show that hard tactics are perceived as being more effective than soft tactics for enhancing constituency commitment to unfavorable results. Women perceive that they use more soft tactics than men to announce unfavorable agreements, while men perceive that they use more soft tactics than women to announce favorable agreements between parties. Overall, the perception of influence exercised over the constituency is strongly affected by gender, along the lines that men tend to explain and justify their successes and not their failures, while women tend to justify their failures and not their successes.Research limitations/implicationsAs the evidence in this study came from self‐report measures, future studies should corroborate findings by observing representative behavior.Practical implicationsThe findings have important implications for training programs of representatives in collective bargaining, particularly in the exercise of influence at the second negotiation round.Originality/valueThe paper demonstrates that gender is an important moderator in representative‐constituency negotiation.

Integrative negotiation in which employers and employees create value is a major necessity in the current challenging context. Collective labor negotiations in organizations are traditionally focused on mostly distributive issues, such as pay, working hours, and holidays. However, the current situation demands the inclusion of other issues of a potentially more integrative nature, such as telework, sustainability, and risk prevention, the enhancement of which is a major challenge for organizations. In this study, we explore the negotiation process between management and employee representatives (ERs), analyzing the roles of trust and trustworthiness. We collected data from 614 human resources managers from different organizations in 11 European countries. The results confirm that ERs who management perceive to be trustworthy have a greater influence on negotiation, particularly with regard to integrative as opposed to distributive issues, and that trust partially mediates this relationship.

Integrative negotiation in which employers and employees create value is a major necessity in the current challenging context. Collective labor negotiations in organizations are traditionally focused on mostly distributive issues, such as pay, working hours, and holidays. However, the current situation demands the inclusion of other issues of a potentially more integrative nature, such as telework, sustainability, and risk prevention, the enhancement of which is a major challenge for organizations. In this study, we explore the negotiation process between management and employee representatives (ERs), analyzing the roles of trust and trustworthiness. We collected data from 614 human resources managers from different organizations in 11 European countries. The results confirm that ERs who management perceive to be trustworthy have a greater influence on negotiation, particularly with regard to integrative as opposed to distributive issues, and that trust partially mediates this relationship.

In the current context of limited resources and economic, social and labour changes, organizational conflicts are becoming more and more competitive. Two possible explanations for this approach to conflict in Spain are the low trust between unions and management and the long tradition of confrontation in industrial relations. In this study we analyse the conflict pattern from worker representatives and the relation to trust in management and union support. The hypotheses are tested in a quantitative study of 719 representatives. Results show that a) representatives use a competitive conflict style; b) trust is negatively related to this style; and c) union support is positively related to the style. We explore how societal culture and historical industrial relations tradition explain these relations.

Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to examine the role that conflict management styles play in the relationship between interpersonal conflict and workplace bullying.


Design/methodology/approach
– A survey study was conducted among 761 employees from different organizations in Spain.


Findings
– Results suggest that an escalation of the conflict process from task related to relationship conflict may explain bullying situations to some extent. Regarding conflict management, attempts to actively manage conflict through problem solving may prevent it escalating to higher emotional levels (relationship conflict) and bullying situations; in contrast, other conflict management strategies seem to foster conflict escalation.


Research limitations/implications
– The correlational design makes the conclusions on causality questionable, and future research should examine the dynamic conflict process in more detail. On the other hand, to the authors' knowledge, this is the first study empirically differentiating interpersonal conflict and workplace bullying.


Originality/value
– This study explores how conflict management can prevent conflict escalating into workplace bullying, which has important implications for occupational health practitioners and managers.

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the relationship between self‐efficacy and the outcomes that individuals achieve when they manage conflict at work. The authors propose that self‐efficacy is related to performance following a positive linear or curvilinear model depending on the outcomes assessed (objective versus subjective outcomes) and the conflict setting considered (transaction versus dispute).Design/methodology/approachTwo studies were conducted. Study 1 was a face‐to‐face transaction in which self‐efficacy was measured using a survey. In study 2, participants were involved in a dispute and their self‐efficacy was manipulated using a false feedback technique.FindingsResults suggest that high self‐efficacy participants obtain better objective (economic/substantive) outcomes. However, there is a curvilinear relationship, in a U‐inverted shape, between self‐efficacy and subjective (relational) outcomes, indicating that an increase in self‐efficacy improves subjective outcomes, but there are certain levels at which self‐efficacy may be dysfunctional.Originality/valueRecent controversial findings in research into the relationship between self‐efficacy and performance are addressed in these studies. The present paper is one of the first to explore the role of self‐efficacy in a dispute and to consider the effects of self‐efficacy on subjective outcomes. Practical implications are discussed in light of the results.

This open access book opens up the black box of mediation in collective conflicts through the analyses and comparisons of various systems. Mediation and related third party interventions such as conciliation and facilitation are discussed as effective prevention and regulation tools for different types of collective labor conflicts. These interventions fit in a new developed five-phase model of collective conflicts in organizations, going from capacity building in latent conflicts, through conciliation, mediation and arbitration in escalating phases, to rebuilding of trust after hot conflicts. The authors promote understanding and discussion with regards to labor mediation systems, presenting comparative research on the perspectives of mediators and users of mediation. This book describes and analyses laws, regulations and practices of mediation in seventeen countries, with a relative strong emphasis on Europe. Part 1 presents theoretical frameworks on conciliation and mediation in collective labor conflicts. Part 2 presents regulations and practices in 12 European countries: Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Part 3 discusses mediation in these collective conflicts in Australia, China, India, South Africa and the USA. Part 4 offers conclusions and ways forward. This book offers analyses, good practices and developments for third party intervention in collective labor conflicts in global and local changing environments. This book is a must-read for policy makers, , social partners at different levels, as well as scholars and practitioners in industrial relations, human resources management and conflict management, particularly conciliators and mediators.