Search results

When Vladimir Putin's forces sought to conquer Ukraine in February 2022, they did more than threaten the survival of a vulnerable democracy. The invasion unleashed a crisis that has changed the course of world affairs. This conflict has reshaped alliances, deepened global cleavages, and caused economic disruptions that continue to reverberate around the globe. It has initiated the first great-power nuclear crisis in decades and raised fundamental questions about the sources of national power and military might in the modern age. The outcome of the conflict will profoundly influence the international balance of power, the relationship between democracies and autocracies, and the rules that govern global affairs. In War in Ukraine, Hal Brands brings together an all-star group of analysts to assess the conflict's origins, course, and implications and to offer their appraisals of one of the most geopolitically consequential crises of the early twenty-first century. Essays cover topics including the twists and turns of the war itself, the successes and failures of US strategy, the impact of sanctions, the future of Russia and its partnership with China, and more.

The present study examines the relation of individual differences in personality to one's preferences for approaching and managing conflict in work settings. This investigation offers a conceptual foundation for relating the Five‐Factor Model (FFM) of personality to strategy preference, tests strategy‐FFM dimension hypotheses, and explores strategy relations with narrower FFM midlevel traits. Managers and supervisors (N = 249) from public, governmental, and private sector organizations completed the Organizational Communication and Conflict Instrument and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Preferences for conflict strategies were found to relate to distinct patterns of FFM dimensions, while narrower midlevel traits provided meaningful insights into the nature of the observed relations.

Research examining the relation of personality to conflict resolution strategy has yet to incorporate the dominant, contemporary view of personality, the five‐factor model (FFM). The use of broad traits (domains), to represent personality, although parsimonious, ignores information contained in narrow personality facets, masks important conceptual relations with various strategies, and has produced inconsistent results. The present study demonstrates that narrow, rather than broad, FFM traits consistently explain greater variance in strategy, and account for significant variance when FFM domain scores appear unrelated to the criterion. These effects are shown to result from the unbinding of criterion‐related from criterion‐unrelated facet scores that are otherwise aggregated into broad domains.