Behavioural sequences in the effectiveness of conflict management

VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 39 Nego ia ion is one o he mos e ec i e means o managing and sol ing dispu es be ween indi i- duals. Howe e , in ce ain cases his p ocess ails, and he consequences o his o bo h pa ies can be disas- ous (Mundua e, 1993). Analysis o he p ocess o ac ions and eac ions, which occu s h oughou a con- lic episode, has in he las ew yea s ecei ed conside- able a en ion om esea che s (e.g., Weinga , P ie ula, Hyde & Geno ese, 1999). This esea ch has been aimed p incipally a : (a) pe mi ing p ecise analysis o he beha iou s used by pa icipan s in esponse o he o he pa y du ing he in e ac ion, and (b) allowing in e- ences abou he in ensi ying o mi iga ing e ec s o con lic managemen beha iou s. Following his line o wo k, in he p esen s udy we analyze hose con lic beha iou s ha p o e o be mos e ec i e o dealing wi h a con lic when i is escala ed o s imula ed by he ad e sa y. One o he de ini ions o con lic mos commonly used by esea che s is ha p oposed by Pu nam and Poole (1987), who de ine con lic as a eac ion o he indi i- dual o he pe cep ion ha he wo pa ies ha e di e en aspi a ions ha canno be achie ed simul aneously. This de ini ion is based on he p emise ha con lic has h ee inhe en p ope ies: (a) in e ac ion, (b) in e depen- dence, in he sense ha each pa y has a deg ee o po en- ial o in e e e wi h he o he , and (c) he pe cei ed exis- ence o an opposi ion o incompa ibili y in he goals pu sued by hose in dispu e. The gene al endency in adi ional esea ch on s yles o beha iou s in con lic managemen has been he iden i ica ion o subjec s’ beha iou al p edisposi ions (e.g., Rahim & Bonoma, 1979; S e nbe g & So iano, 1984). Such s udies s a ou om he basis ha he sub- jec is p edisposed o using a pa icula con lic s yle h oughou he con lic episode (Nico e a, 1994). Howe e , some au ho s ha e ques ioned his line o esea ch, s essing, i s , he need o obse e he ac ual p ocess o social in e ac ion among he opposing sides in he con lic episode o an unde s anding o he ea- sons why subjec s choose ce ain beha iou s (Knapp, Pu nam & Da is, 1988; Mundua e, Luque & Ba ón, The o iginal Spanish e sion o his pape has been p e iously published in Psico hema, 2003, Vol. 15, No 1, 12-18 ........... Co espondence conce ning his a icle should be add essed o F ancisco J. Medina, Facul ad de Psicología, Uni e sidad de Se illa, 41005 Se illa (Spain). E-mail: [email p o ec ed] Copy igh 2004 by he Colegio O icial de Psicólogos. Spain Psychology in Spain, 2004, Vol. 8. No 1, 38-47 Beha iou al sequences in he e ec i eness o con lic managemen . The aim o his s udy was o analyze whe he he use o con lic beha iou o e he s ages o an escala ed con lic episode di e s be ween e ec i e and ine ec i e nego ia o s. Pa icipan s we e asked o sol e, on-line, an o ganiza ional con lic wi h a subo dina e. The subo dina e was a con ede a- e who was ins uc ed o escala e he con lic episode in h ee le els: i ializa ion – using a oiding beha iou s; no ms a acks – using indi ec igh beha iou s; and pe sonal a acks – using di ec igh beha iou s. Con lic beha iou and e ec- i eness we e assessed h ough obse a ional measu es. Sequen ial analysis showed ha i is possible o di e en ia e be - ween e ec i e and ine ec i e pa icipan s, wi h e ec i e pa icipan s eac ing in a complemen a y way o bo h a oiding and di ec igh beha iou s. El p opósi o del p esen e es udio ue analiza si los negociado es e ec i os e ine ec i os di ie en en sus espues as al esca- lamien o del con lic o. Los negociado es desa olla on un ol play, mediado po o denado , con un oponen e ic icio que escalaba el episodio de con lic o en es ni eles: i ialización –u ilizando conduc as de e i ación –; a aques a las no mas de la emp esa –u ilizando conduc as de lucha indi ec a– y a aques pe sonales –u ilizando conduc as de lucha di ec a–. Las conduc as de ges ión de con lic o u ilizadas po los suje os expe imen ales y la e ec i idad diádica se analiza on median e la obse ación de las in e acciones. Los esul s, de i ados del análisis secuencial de la in e acción, mos a on que los suje- os e ec i os esponden de o ma complemen a ia an o a las conduc as de lucha di ec a, como a las conduc as de e i a- ción u ilizadas po el oponen e. BEHAVIOURAL SEQUENCES IN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT F ancisco J. Medina, Miguel A. Do ado, Inmaculada F.J. de Cisne os, Alicia A é alo and Lou des Mundua e Uni e si y o Se ille 1997), and second, how hese beha iou s in luence he e ec i eness o his p ocess (Van de Vlie , 1997). Thus, he aim o he p esen wo k was o analyze he beha- iou al sequences in he cou se o a dyadic in e pe sonal con lic , and he e ec i eness o hese sequences. EFFECTIVENESS OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT BEHAVIOURS The analysis o he e ec i eness o con lic manage- men beha iou s has adi ionally been app oached om h ee pe spec i es: he one-bes -way pe spe i e, he con- ingency pe spec i e and he complexi y pe spec i e (Van de Vlie , 1997). The one-bes -way pe spec i a is based on he no ion ha some con lic managemen s yles a e mo e e ec i e han o he s. Thus, p oblem-sol ing is conside ed o be he mos cons uc i e s yle, since i allows o he wo pa ies o uni e hei in e es s, wi h a iew o eaching an ag eemen sa is ac o y o all hose in dispu e (Van de Vlie , Euwema & Huismans, 1995). In con as , he mos p ejudicial esul s a e ound when he subjec adop s a mo e domina ing o compe i i e app oach, which is exp essed in ac ical use o in o ma ion o an inc ease in pe sonal a acks (Olekalns, Smi h & Walsh, 1996; Van de Vlie e al., 1995). The con ingency pe spec i e o con lic managemen main ains ha each ype o con lic managemen beha- iou is app op ia e acco ding o he si ua ion (Thomas, 1992). A ele an di icul y wi h he con ingency pe spec- i e esides in i s lack o conside a ion ha con lic mana- gemen occu s o e he cou se o a p ocess o in e ac ion, du ing which he pa ies equen ly change om one beha iou o ano he in a single con lic episode (Mundua e, Ganaza, Pei ó & Euwema, 1999; Nico e a, 1994; P ui & Ca ne ale, 1993). No does his app oach ake in o accoun ha e ec i eness may be de e mined by he demands o he momen o o he sequence in which a gi en s a egy is used (Olekalns, Smi h & Walsh, 1996). The e o e, some au ho s ha e p oposed a new line o s udy o e ec i eness, called he complexi y pe spec i e. In he analysis o he complexi y pe spec i e, esea ch on he e ec i eness o con lic managemen beha iou s has de eloped in h ee dimensions: (a) he i s o hese a emp s o analyze simul aneous complexi y, assuming ha in e dependen modes o beha iou may p edic he e ec i eness o con lic managemen (e.g., Mundua e e al., 1999; Van de Vlie e al., 1995); (b) he second analyzes empo al complexi y, ocusing on he phases h ough which he pa icipan ’s beha iou passes, and assuming ha knowledge o e ec i eness equi es s ud- ying he momen a which each beha iou is employed (e.g., Olekalns e al., 1996); and (c) he hi d dimension deals wi h sequen ial complexi y, on he assump ion ha dyadic e ec i eness depends no only on he combina- ion o modes o beha iou , bu also on how hese occu du ing he in e ac ion (e.g., Van de Vlie , Nau a, Giebels & Janssen, 1999; Weinga , Thompson, Baze man & Ca oll, 1990). The p esen wo k concen- a es on some o he aspec s in ol ed in he hi d o he dimensions de i ed om he complexi y pe spec i e, ha o sequen ial complexi y. Thus, and ollowing Van de Vlie e al. (1999), we conside dyadic e ec i eness o de i e no only om he combina ion o ce ain con lic managemen beha iou s, bu also om hei sequence in he cou se o he in e ac- ion. In his con ex , Weinga e al. (1990) dis inguish wo ypes o sequen ial pa e n: ecip oci y, unde s ood as he esponse o he o he pa y wi h he same beha- iou as hey used in he p e ious u n; and complemen- a i y, unde s ood as he eac ion o he ad e sa y’s ac ion using opposing beha iou s. Many beha iou s end o be ecip ocal wi hin a con lic episode, such as commen s on ma e s o p ocedu e, he communica ion o a ec i e s a es o ce ain a oiding beha iou s (e.g., Weinga e al., 1990). O he beha iou s end o be com- plemen a y, such as de ensi e esponses o an a ack, o ice e sa (e.g., Pu nam & Jones, 1982). In his sameline o wo k, B e , Shapi o and Ly le (1998) analyzed whe he he ecip oci y o he con on- a ion beha iou s modi ies he cou se o he nego ia ion. These au ho s ound e idence ha , in a con on a ion si ua ion, he e is a gene al endency o ecip oci y, ha is, o using agg essi e o dominance beha iou s in he ace o a acks ecei ed om he ad e sa y. This esul is also ound in p e ious wo k (Nau a, Van de Vlie & Sie o, 1995; Weinga e al., 1990). A second line o esea ch in he s udy o sequen ial complexi y conce ns he analysis o he e ec i eness o he sequen ial pa - e ns employed in a con lic episode. In his ega d, B e e al. (1998) ound ha ecip oci y in esponse o domi- na ion beha iou s p oduces esul s ha a e highly un a- ou able o he pa ies in dispu e, as i ends o igge a si ua ion o impasse o s agna ion. On he o he hand, complemen a y beha iou s in hos ile si ua ions appea o be highly posi i e in mi iga ing he con lic , since hey educe i s in ensi y and pe mi open communica ion VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 40 be ween he pa ies (Janssen & Van de Vlie , 1996). Ne e heless, he majo i y o s udies ha ha e analyzed ecip oci y o complemen a i y in esponse o con on a- ion beha iou s ha e op ed o si ua ions in which such con on a ion appea s om he ou se o he in e ac ion. Thus, B e e al. (1998) s ess he impo ance o s udying ecip oci y and complemen a i y, in ela ion o con on a- ion beha iou s, ha occu s when he in e ac ion is al e- ady well in p og ess. Following his line, he p esen s udy ocuses on con lic si ua ions in which he in ensi y o he con on a ion be ween he pa ies g adually inc eases. Wi hin his con ex o escala ion, he objec i e o his s udy is o analyze beha iou s o ecip oci y and comple- men a i y in he ace o he ad e sa y’s esponse, and how hese a e ela ed o he e ec i eness o he nego ia o s. Based on he li e a u e men ioned abo e, ou hypo he- ses a e as ollows: - Hypo hesis 1: Nego ia o s will use mo e pa e ns o ecip oci y han o complemen a i y in an escala ed con lic . - Hypo hesis 2: E ec i e nego ia o s will use ewe pa e ns o ecip oci y han ine ec i e nego ia o s in an escala ed con lic . - Hypo hesis 3: E ec i e nego ia o s will use mo e pa e ns o complemen a i y han ine ec i e nego- ia o s in an escala ed con lic . METHODOLOGY Pa icipan s We selec ed 87 people, 33 o whom we e men (37.9%) and 54 o whom we e women (61.1%) om doc o al s uden s a he uni e si ies o Se ille and Valencia and he Andalusian Council o Labou Rela ions. A high pe cen age o he o al sample (97.7%), a he ime o he s udy, we e ca ying ou managemen - ype wo k in hei no mal job, wi h esponsibili y o e o he s. Age ange was 22 o 56 yea s, wi h a mean o 29.95 and a s anda d de ia ion o 6.96. All pa icipan s we e unawa e o he objec i es o he s udy, which was p esen ed o hem as a p ac ical exe cise on con lic managemen . P ocedu e Pa icipan s we e ecei ed by he esea che s in a oom whe e hey we e in o med abou he phases o he exe - cise and gi en ins uc ions o a gene al na u e abou he ask. They we e old ha he ask consis ed in handling a con lic wi h a subo dina e, who would no be in he same place, so ha communica ion would be ia com- pu e . A his in oduc ion we ook down hei sociode- mog aphic da a (gende , age, educa ional le el), s essed he impo ance o paying a en ion o he messages ha would appea on he compu e sc een, and old hem o ead ca e ully he guide o he ole hey would play in he ole-play exe cise and o p epa e hemsel es well be o e beginning he in e ac ions so ha hey would no be unde ime p essu e. A e ecei ing hese ins uc- ions, pa icipan s we e allo ed a compu e , on which hey began he nego ia ion ask. All pa icipan s ecei ed ins uc ions on hei moni o sc een abou hei ole in he nego ia ion exe cise, and we e gi en a pencil and pape so ha hey could, i hey wished, p epa e a cou se o ac ion o guide he in e ac- ion. No ime limi s we e se o p epa ing he nego ia- ion. As indica ed abo e, he pa icipan ’s ask was o esol e a con lic , on-line, wi h a subo dina e. The con- lic was ela ed o a se ious p oblem ha had ecen ly occu ed be ween he subo dina e – a salesman om he company – and he o ganiza ion’s mos impo an clien . This subo dina e was always a con ede a e o he ese- a che s, so ha his/he esponses we e s anda dized and p e iously designed by hem wi h he aim o escala ing he con lic on h ee le els. These h ee le els consis ed in a i s phase o i ializa ion, in which he inciden was ela i ized by means o a oiding beha iou s, using ph ases such as: ‘in eali y no hing has happened – M . Sage and I know each o he qui e well, and his is he esul o no hing mo e han ha amilia i y’; a second phase o a acks on company no ms, in which he o ga- niza ion’s comme cial policy was ques ioned h ough beha iou s o indi ec igh , wi h ph ases such as: ‘I unde s and you conce n abou wha happened wi h M . Sage, bu i would be mo e use ul o all o us o con- cen a e on he o igin o he p oblem, which is in he company’s policy’; and a hi d phase o pe sonal a acks, in which he ad e sa y’s beha iou and in en ions we e ques ioned, using beha iou s o indi ec igh , and ph a- ses such as: ‘wha ac ually goes on in he eal wo ld is qui e di e en om wha you see in you o ice’. S anda diza ion o he con ede a e’s esponses was a p io i y, in an a emp o ensu e ha all pa icipan s ollowed he same p ocess o s imula ion o he con lic , and his s anda diza ion was alida ed in a p e ious s udy ca ied ou wi h en s uden s. T ansc ip ions o all he in e ac ions we e eco ded o subsequen coding and analysis. Once he expe imen al ask was o e , pa icipan s we e VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 41 deb ie ed abou i s aims, and we e asked whe he hey hough hey had beha ed in a simila way o how hey would ha e beha ed in a eal si ua ion. They we e also asked whe he hey had de ec ed any a i iciali y in he esponses o hei ad e sa y. We hanked hem o hei pa icipa ion and eques ed hem no o discuss he objec i es o con en o he expe imen wi h hei colle- agues. None o he pa icipan s conside ed he esponses o his/he ad e sa y o escala ing he con lic o ha e seemed a i icial, and all o hem claimed hey would ac in a simila way in a eal si ua ion. Assessmen o he a iables Two a iables we e analyzed in he p esen s udy: a) con- lic managemen beha iou s, and b) dyadic e ec i e- ness. Con lic managemen beha iou s we e ope a iona- lized h ough obse a ional analysis o he in e ac ions, using a specially-designed sys em o ca ego ies based on he beha iou al ypology o Van de Vlie and Euwema (1994). Six judges ained o such coding ca ied ou he analysis o he con lic managemen beha iou s. In e - judge eliabili y was measu ed by means o Cohen’s K. Mean K index was 0.90 ( ange 0.87-0.93). A summa y o his ypology can be seen in Table 1. Analysis o nego ia ing e ec i eness was ca ied ou by means o obse a ional analysis o he in e ac ions, using he a ing scale de eloped on he basis o he indi- ca o s p oposed by Van de Vlie and colleagues (e.g., Van de Vlie e al., 1995). Thus, we used eigh a ing scales wi h i e esponse op ions: (a) impo ance o he issues in ol ed in he con lic ; (b) p oximi y o he solu- ion; (c) quali y o a possible ag eed solu ion; (d) possi- bili y o a new con lic be ween he pa ies; (e) amilia- i y be ween he pa ies; ( ) mu ual unde s anding; (g) clima e be ween he pa ies, and (h) pe sonal ela ions- hips. Two ained obse e s coded nego ia ing e ec i e- ness, and co ela ions be ween hem we e e y high, wi h a mean o 0.79, a minimum o 0.66 and a maximum o 0.88. On he basis o pa icipan s’ sco es in nego ia- ing e ec i eness, wo g oups we e o med: e ec i e g oup, wi h sco es abo e pe cen ile 50, and ine ec i e g oup, wi h sco es below pe cen ile 50. Resul s In o de o analyze he sequences o con lic manage- men beha iou s we ca ied ou a lag sequen ial analysis (Sacke , Holm, C owley & Henkins, 1979). In his analysis, each ac ion o beha iou , in his case each spe- ech u n ( he on-line messages), is conside ed as an obse a ion. Lag sequen ial analysis ecognizes beha- iou al pa e ns o nego ia ion on iden i ying s a is i- cally signi ican di e ences be ween obse ed equen- cies and expec ed equencies o he hypo he ical sequences o con lic managemen . These sequences a e made up o an an eceden and a subsequen beha iou sepa a ed by a lag. A lag is de ined as he numbe o beha iou s ha occu be ween he an eceden beha iou and he subsequen beha iou (Bakeman & Go man, 1989). In his case he s anda dized messages o he ad e sa y ( he esea che s’ con ede a e) a e always he an eceden beha iou s, and he immedia e esponses o he pa icipan s ( hose making up he sample) a e he subsequen beha iou s. The e is he e o e a lag 1, since he wo elemen s in he sequence a e consecu i e. In o de o ca y ou he sequen ial analysis o he da a VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 42 Table 1 Con lic managemen beha iou s. Model o Van de Vlie and Euwema (1994) A oidance – T i ializing. – Asking i ele an ques ions wi h he aim o pu ing an end o he dialogue. – T ying o pos pone he p oblem in o de o e lec . Example: ‘Why don’ we shel e he p oblem un il we’ e spoken o he clien ?’ Accommoda ion – Accep ing he o he ’s sugges ions. – Ac ing as he ad e sa y wished. – Making concessions o he o he pa y. Example: ‘I hink you’ e igh and i would be good o do wha you say’. Comp omise – T ying o ind middle ways o p og ess owa ds a solu ion o he con lic . – – P oposing solu ions ha sa is y bo h pa ies. – – Yielding on some poin s in exchange o o he s. Example: ‘I you we e o apologize o he clien , I could alk o managemen abou wha you sugges ’ P oblem-sol ing – Seeking in o ma ion ha pe mi s a ho ough app oach o he p oblem. – Analyzing he si ua ion wi h he ad e sa y oge he . – In eg a ing one’s own ideas and hose o he o he pa y o each a join decision. Example: ‘And how would you eel i I spoke o he clien and ied o so his p oblem ou ?’ Di ec igh – Discussing openly he issues o he con lic , i s causes and he a i ude adop ed du ing i . Example: ‘I’m as onished and ang y a you a i ude. I don’ unde s and how you could do such an inapp op ia e hing’. – Ac ing di ec ly, o ien ing one’s ac ions owa ds he achie e- men o he objec i es, igno ing he needs and expec a ions o he o he pa y. Examples: h ea s, accusa ions, p essu e, abusi e language, e bal a acks, unpleasan o hu ul commen s. Indi ec igh – Raising objec ions o he o he pa y’s plans. – Delibe a ely wis ing he issue o he con lic . – Tangling hings up in p ocedu al ma e s. Example: ‘We should alk abou he ules, abou he p ocedu e o assigning clien s, no abou such conc e e issues as hose you p opose’. we used he s a is ical p og am Gene alized Sequen ial Que ie (GSEQ), de eloped by Bakeman and Que a (1996). This p og am eads, desc ibes and analyzes sequen ial da a ha ollow he SDIS (Sequen ial Da a In e change S anda d) no m. The p og am pe mi s analysis o a ious ypes o da a; hose analyzed in he p esen s udy a e o he ESD (E en Sequen ial Da a) ype, cha ac e ized by con aining in o ma ion on he o de in which e en s occu . Table 2 shows he obse ed and expec ed equencies o he con lic managemen beha iou s deployed by he pa icipan s in esponse o he messages o he ad e sa y ( he con ede a e). Beha iou s o di ec igh , p oblem- sol ing and indi ec igh a e he mos equen , ollo- wed by hose o accommoda ion and a oidance. As can be seen om he esul s in Table 2, he pa e n o eci- p oci y only appea s in esponse o beha iou s o indi- ec igh . Tha is, when pa icipan s ecei e a beha iou o indi ec igh om hei ad e sa y hey espond wi h a simila message. On he o he hand, we do no ind ecip ocal pa e ns when he ad e sa y a oids con lic o p esen s di ec igh beha iou . Thus, he e is no con i - ma ion o Hypo hesis 1 o he p esen s udy, which p e- dic ed g ea e use o ecip oci y in he ace o he ad e - sa y’s con on a ion beha iou . I is in e es ing o no e ha pa icipan s espond in a complemen a y way o a oiding beha iou s by he ad e sa y, employing di ec igh signi ican ly mo e han expec ed. In u n, pa ici- pan s also espond in a complemen a y way o di ec igh beha iou s by he o he pa y, employing mo e a oiding and accommoda ion beha iou s han expec ed. Tha is, i we obse e in conjunc ion he eac ions o a oiding beha iou s and o di ec igh beha iou s, we ind complemen a y pa e ns: pa icipan s eac wi h di ec igh beha iou s o a oidance, and wi h a oiding beha iou s o di ec igh . Table 3 shows he obse ed and expec ed equencies o he beha iou s used by e ec i e and ine ec i e pa - icipan s. When he esea che s’ con ede a e uses a oi- ding beha iou s he e ec i e pa icipan s make mo e use han expec ed o di ec igh beha iou s, and less use o accommoda ion and p oblem-sol ing messages. Ine ec i e pa icipan s, on he o he hand, use ewe ecip ocal a oiding beha iou s and accommoda ion beha iou s. When he con ede a e emi s messages o indi ec igh , he mos e ec i e pa icipan s mo e e- quen ly use ecip ocal beha iou s o indi ec igh , and p esen less use o di ec igh beha iou s. In ine ec i e pa icipan s we also ound he pa e n o ecip oci y o indi ec igh beha iou s om he ad e sa y. Finally, in esponse o di ec igh messages, e ec i e pa icipan s made g ea e use o p oblem-sol ing, accommoda ion and a oiding beha iou s. These pa icipan s also used ewe di ec igh beha iou s. As a as ine ec i e pa i- cipan s a e conce ned, i was ound ha in esponse o he o he ’s di ec igh beha iou s, hey made signi i- can ly mo e use han expec ed o a oiding beha iou s. Focusing on he pa e ns o ecip oci y and comple- men a i y in he e ec i e and ine ec i e nego ia o s, i should be s essed, in ela ion o ecip oci y, ha in es- VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 43 Table 2 F equencies o he pa icipan s’ con lic managemen beha iou s Messages om con ede a e Pa icipan ’s esponses A oidance Indi ec igh Di ec igh A oidance 4/12 ++ 9/10 17/8 ** Indi ec igh 43/45 52/39 ** 23/33 + Di ec igh 249/213 ** 162/183 ++ 142/157 Accommoda ion 3/11 ++ 13/10 13/8 * Comp omise 2/7 + 9/6 6/5 P oblem-sol ing 158/171 149/147 136/125 No e: P obabili ies o obse ed equencies lowe han expec ed equencies + p<.05 ++ p<.01 P obabili ies o obse ed equencies highe han expec ed equencies * p<.05 ** p<.01 Table 3 F equencies o he pa icipan s’ con lic managemen beha iou s and e ec i eness Messages om con ede a e A oidance Indi ec igh Di ec igh Pa icipan ’s esponses E ec i e Ine ec i e E ec i e Ine ec i e E ec i e Ine ec i e A oidance 1/3 3/8 + 3/3 6/7 5/3 * 12/6 ** Indi ec igh 14/17 29/29 22/15 * 30/23 * 9/13 14/20 Di ec igh 102/72 ** 147/144 54/66 + 108/115 38/56 ++ 104/100 Accommoda ion 3/8 + 0/2 + 9/8 4/2 11/7 * 2/2 Comp omise 1/4 1/3 5/3 4/2 4/3 2/2 P oblem-sol ing 102/119 ++ 56/49 113/110 36/39 107/93 * 29/34 No e: P obabili ies o obse ed equencies lowe han expec ed equencies + p<.05 ++ p<.01 P obabili ies o obse ed equencies highe han expec ed equencies * p<.05 ** p<.01 ponse o di ec igh beha iou s, e ec i e nego ia o s use ewe beha iou s o ecip oci y. These da a pa ially sup- po Hypo hesis 2 o he p esen wo k: i is con i med ha he e is less use o ecip oci y beha iou s by he e ec i e nego ia o s in he ace o di ec igh beha- iou s, bu his lesse use is no con i med in he case o indi ec igh beha iou s. As ega ds complemen a i y beha iou s, e ec i e nego ia o s use hese in esponse o beha iou s o a oidance and indi ec igh – ha is, aced wi h a oidance hey employ mo e di ec igh beha- iou s, and aced wi h di ec igh hey use mo e a oi- ding, accommoda ion and p oblem-sol ing beha iou s. I is obse ed, in his ega d, ha he e ec i e pa ici- pan s espond in a complemen a y way o a acks ecei- ed om he ad e sa y. Howe e , ine ec i e nego ia o s only use complemen a i y h ough esponses o a oidan- ce when aced wi h di ec igh . These da a con i m Hypo hesis 3, which p edic ed g ea e use o comple- men a i y beha iou s on he pa o e ec i e nego ia o s. DISCUSSION The goal o he p esen s udy was, i s o all, o analyze he pa e ns o ecip oci y and complemen a i y be ween nego ia o s in an escala ed con lic ; a second aim was o ela e hese pa e ns o he e ec i eness and ine ec i e- ness o hese nego ia o s. The s udy’s mos ele an in- ding ela es o he capaci y shown by e ec i e nego ia- o s o b eak he cou se o ac ion es ablished by he o he pa y o escala ing he con lic , using o his pu pose beha iou s complemen a y o hose o hei ad e sa y. We shall discuss he mos ele an indings in acco - dance wi h wo s ages: in he i s o hese, we shall dis- cuss he pa e ns o ecip oci y and complemen a i y ound in esponse o escala ion o he con lic ; and secondly, we shall conside hei dyadic e ec i eness. As ega ds he i s o hese aspec s, he mos ele an indings we e as ollows: (a) indi ec igh beha iou s end o be ecip ocal, (b) a oiding beha iou s elici beha iou s o di ec igh in he o he pa y, whils hey inhibi he use o a oiding, accommoda ion and com- p omise beha iou s; and (c) di ec igh beha iou s p o- duce, in he ad e sa y, g ea e use o accommoda ion and a oiding beha iou s, and lesse use o indi ec igh beha iou s. Thus, i is ound ha subjec s end o ac ecip ocally in esponse o he o he pa y’s indi ec igh beha iou s, sugges ing ha when one o he pa ies in con lic a emp s o eo ien he discou se owa ds colla e al issues – con olling he p ocess o showing esis ance o open discussion – he e is a gene al endency on he pa o he o he o y and p e en his occu ing, eo ien ing he discussion once mo e owa ds he cen al issue o he con lic . This pa e n o beha iou al ecip oci y in es- ponse o p ocedu al s a egies has been desc ibed p e- iously by o he au ho s (e.g., De D eu e al., 1999). Mo eo e , we obse ed a endency in pa icipan s o espond in a complemen a y way o di ec igh beha- iou s wi h a oiding beha iou s, and ice e sa. Thus, when he pa icipan wishes o a oid o pos pone con- lic , he ad e sa y ends o espond h ough accusa ions, ep oaches o di ec o de s; in con as , when he pa i- cipan ecei es pe sonal a acks, he e is a endency on he pa o he o he o a oid con lic . This esul can be in e p e ed in wo di e en ways. On he one hand, i is possible ha subjec s espond spon aneously, h ough di ec igh beha iou s agains hei ad e sa y, when he la e ies o pos pone he con lic o no con on i openly. In his ega d, some au ho s conside ha naming beha iou is a highly s able beha iou ha depends o a g ea e ex en on he subjec ’s mo i a ional o ien a ion han on he in e en ions o he ad e sa y (Rhoades & Ca ne ale, 1999); hus, his beha iou may o m pa o he na u al epe oi e o esponse when he subjec aces a con lic g owing in in ensi y. In a simila line, some au ho s assume, in any con lic episode, wo clea ly dis inguishable s ages: an ini ial one o di e en- ia ion, in which each pa y de ends his/he own in e- es s, and an in eg a ion s age, in which he pa ies de end common in e es s (Van de Vlie e al., 1999). Thus, i may be ha subjec s end o di e en ia e hei posi ions in he ea ly s ages o he con lic , so ha di ec igh beha iou s will end o o m pa o he beha iou- al epe oi e a he beginning o he in e ac ion. A second in e p e a ion in ol es he possibili y ha he subjec uses di ec igh because he/she pe cei es a ce - ain weakness in he ad e sa y, on obse ing ha he la - e is employing a oiding beha iou s (P ui & Ca ne ale, 1993). As ega ds he complemen a i y o di ec igh beha iou s, h ough esponses o a oidance and accommoda ion, i is ele an o poin ou ha hese beha iou s o m pa , in o he ypologies (e.g., Pu nam & Wilson, 1982), o he non-con on a ional s yle. This desi e o non-con on a ion, which appea s a a s age in which he con lic is o high in ensi y, may be unde s o- od by he ad e sa y as a de ensi e esponse o an a ack ecei ed, and conside ed as a o m o pe mi ing ela- VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 44 ions o be main ained in he u u e (Ohbuchi & Takahashi, 1994). These esul s do no wholly con i m he i s o he hypo heses, ha is, he use o ecip oci y in esponse o an escala ed con lic . Ne e heless, i we analyze he beha iou s used by he pa icipan s on he basis o con- ce n heo y, which unde pins bidimensional models o con lic managemen s yles – see, o example, he ypo- logy o con lic managemen s yles by Rahim and Bonoma (1979) –, we can ind an explana ion o his aspec . Thus, we ind ha he beha iou s used in he escala ion o con lic in he p esen s udy – a oiding, indi ec igh and di ec igh – and he esponses wi h highe equency han expec ed o m pa o he same dimension: he ul ilmen o pe sonal in e es s. This sug- ges s ha , in a si ua ion o con lic escala ion, subjec s will espond ecip ocally o he mo i a ion o he o he ’s beha iou – ha is, he sa is ac ion o sel -in e es . The esul s o o he s udies on ecip oci y in ela ion o dis- ibu i e beha iou s (e.g., Weinga e al., 1999) may ha e he same explana ion, since he dis ibu i e beha- iou s conside ed by hese au ho s (e.g., s anding i m, o a guing one’s own posi ion insis en ly and pe suasi- ely) a e also aimed a maximizing pe sonal in e es s, o he de imen o hose o he ad e sa y. As ega ds he analysis o he dyadic e ec i eness o he beha iou al sequences used by pa icipan s in es- ponse o escala ion o he con lic , he mos ele an in- ding o he p esen s udy conce ns he ac ha e ec i e nego ia o s espond in a complemen a y way o hei ad e sa y’s in e en ions o escala ing he con lic . E ec i e subjec s use di ec igh beha iou s when hei ad e sa y i ializes he inciden . As some au ho s ha e poin ed ou (Rubin, P ui & Kim, 1994), his beha- iou al esponse pa e n in which pa icipan s use di ec igh in he ace o a emp s a i ializa ion o a oidan- ce is e ec i e o he ollowing easons: (a) i pe mi s di e en ia ion be ween he di e se posi ions p esen in he con lic episode; and (b) i minimizes he p obabili y o he con lic being pos poned o s agna ing. The beha- iou al pa e n o di e en ia ion-in eg a ion, men ioned abo e, has shown i s e ec i eness in he managemen o an escala ed con lic (Van de Vlie e al., 1999). Acco ding o his idea, he e ec i e esolu ion o an escala ed con lic should begin wi h a i s s age in which he subjec s di e en ia e hei posi ions, o mo e on o a second s age in which hey y o in eg a e hei unde lying needs in he inal solu ion o he con lic . The use o di ec igh beha iou s pe mi s di e en ia ion be - ween he ini ial posi ions o he wo pa icipan s, so ha , once his di e en ia ion has been es ablished, he a emp s a in eg a ion can be mo e easily accep ed by he ad e sa y, as hey a e pe cei ed as cons uc i e beha iou s aimed a he achie emen o an ag eemen bene icial o bo h pa ies (Van de Vlie e al., 1999). Ano he in e es ing esul o he p esen s udy is ha he mos e ec i e pa icipan s end o espond o di ec igh in a complemen a y ashion, using beha iou s o accommoda ion and p oblem-sol ing. As a as accom- moda ion is conce ned, his esul sugges s ha on ce - ain occasions unila e al yielding may be an e ec i e beha iou o mi iga ing he de imen al e ec s o con- lic escala ion. The use o accommoda ion is a qui e simple o m o esol ing con lic s, and which may be alid in ce ain con ex ual ci cums ances (e.g., Thomas, 1992). While i is ue ha unila e al yielding, whe eby he yielding pa y’s p oblems emain un esol ed and his/he needs unsa is ied, is a a om op imum o c ea- i e solu ion (F iedman, Tidd, Cu all & Tsai, 2000; Spi zbe g, Cana y & Cupach, 1994), some componen s o de e en beha iou may indeed be p oduc i e o managing an escala ed con lic . Such beha iou may be pe cei ed by he ad e sa y as a sign o willingness o each an ag eemen , mo e han a sign o weakness (Van de Vlie , 1997), and can acili a e posi i e a ec be we- en he wo pa ies, as well as mu ual posi i e app ecia- ion (Wayne, Liden, G a & Fe is, 1997). As ega ds p oblem-sol ing beha iou s, he p esen wo k shows ha i is mo e p oduc i e o he pa icipan o espond o he p o oca ions o he o he pa y, and o his/he pe sonal a ack, a emp ing o unde s and his/he easons and seeking a c ea i e solu ion ha may sa is y bo h. Thus, he mos e ec i e nego ia o s espond in a complemen a y way o he dis ibu i e beha iou s o hei ad e sa y (e.g., Weinga e al., 1990) – ha is, e ec i e nego ia o s y o econcile join in e es s, in esponse o he o he ’s disc imina i e and compe i i e in en ions. I has been demons a ed, in his ega d, ha he mos in eg a i e s yles educe he expe ience o con- lic and s ess a wo k, while s yles o domina ion and a oidance inc ease he pe cep ion o hese aspec s (F iedman e al., 2000). In sum, bo h p oblem-sol ing beha iou s and accom- moda ion beha iou s ha e a g ea ad an age wi h es- pec o o he con lic managemen beha iou s: hey a e capable o educing he in ensi y o he con lic , and VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 45 consequen ly, i s escala ion. Some s udies ha e shown ha bo h ypes o beha iou ha e mi iga ing e ec s on con lic , mo e so han o he beha iou s, such as com- p omise o a oidance (e.g., Janssen & Van de Vlie , 1996; Rubin e al., 1994). Van de Vlie (1997) p oposes an explana ion o he mi iga ing powe o accommoda ion and p oblem-sol- ing, based on conce n heo y, as men ioned abo e. Thus, a change in he dimension o sel -in e es o he dimension o he o he ’s in e es – which is wha occu s when he subjec uses accommoda ion o p oblem-sol- ing beha iou in esponse o di ec igh – has mi iga- ing e ec s on he dynamic o con lic , whils a beha- iou al change wi hin he same dimension, which is wha occu s when he subjec changes om a oidance o di ec igh , o example, does no p oduce changes in he endency o escala ion o de-escala ion, bu a he leads simply o a change in he dynamic o coope a ion be ween he pa ies. In his sense, he esul s o he p e- sen wo k a e in acco dance wi h he indings o Janssen and Van de Vlie (1996), who showed, using di e se me hodologies, ha high le els o conce n wi h he o he ’s in e es , exp essed in beha iou s such as accom- moda ion o p oblem-sol ing, lead o a educ ion in in ensi y o he con lic and an imp o emen in ela ions be ween he pa ies. The p esen s udy, hen, shows ha e ec i e nego ia o s ake in o conside a ion, on ca ying ou hei p oposals, he in e es s o he o he pa y in a si ua ion o con lic escala ion, despi e he ac ha he ad e sa y’s esponse may be o ien ed owa ds he ul il- men o his o he pe sonal in e es s. Ce ain limi a ions o his s udy may ha e a ec ed he esul s ound. I is possible ha he i e e sible beha- iou al cou se used by he esea che s’ con ede a e mean ha he pa icipan used pa icula beha iou s in esponse ha a e less likely o be ound in a mo e na u- al si ua ion. Indeed, g ea e lexibili y in he con lic escala ion p ocess may help in u u e esea ch. Thus, o example, a oiding beha iou by he con ede a e migh no appea exclusi ely a he beginning o he con lic episode (whe e i coincides wi h he di e en ia ion phase), and di ec igh beha iou migh no appea exclusi ely a he end (whe e i coincides wi h he in e- g a ion phase). In spi e o such ecommenda ions o imp o emen in u u e s udies on beha iou al sequences, i should be s essed ha he design o he p esen wo k has made pos- sible ele an indings wi h impo an p ac ical implica- ions. The ac ha he e ec i e pa icipan s espond wi h complemen a y beha iou s o he a acks ecei ed om hei ad e sa y sugges he need o ain nego ia o s o b eak he cou se o ac ion es ablished by he o he pa y o escala ing he con lic . The s a egy o no eplica ing posi ions o h ea , and o disa ming he ad e sa y h ough beha iou s o complemen a i y, has p o ed o be e ec i e o managing an escala ed con lic . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This esea ch was pa ially inanced by a g an om he Di ección Gene al de Enseñanza Supe io e In es igación Cien í ica (DGESIC). (P oyec o PB96- 1302-CO4-01). REFERENCES Bakeman, R. & Go man, J.M. (1989). Obse ación de la in e acción. In oducción al análisis secuencial. Mad id: Mo a a. Bakeman, R. & Que a, V. (1996). Análisis de la in e ac- ción. Análisis secuencial con SDIS y GSEQ. Mad id: RA-MA edi o ial. B e , J.M., Shapi o, D.L. & Ly le, A.L. (1998). B eaking he bond o ecip oci y in nego ia ions. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 41, 410-424. De D eu, C.K.W., Ha inck, F. & Van Vianen, A.E.M. (1999). Con lic and pe o mance in g oups and o ga- niza ions. In C.L. Coope & I.T. Robe son (Eds). In e na ional Re iew o Indus ial and O ganiza ional Psychology (pp. 376-405). Chiches e : Wiley. F iedman, R.A., Tidd, S.T., Cu all, S.C., & Tsai, J.C. (2000). Wha goes a ound comes a ound: The impac o pe sonal con lic s yles on wo k con lic and s ess. In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic Managemen , 11, 32-55. Janssen, O. & Van de Vlie , E. (1996). Conce n o he o he ’s goals: Key o (de-) escala ion o con lic . In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic Managemen , 7, 99- 120. Knapp, M.L., Pu nam, L.L. & Da is, L.J. (1988). Measu ing in e pe sonal con lic in o ganiza ions: Whe e do we go om he e? Managemen Communica ion Qua e ly, 1, 414-429. Mundua e, L. (1993). La ap oximación psicosocial al es udio del con lic o y la negociación labo al en España: una e isión. Psico hema, 5, 261-275. Mundua e, L., Luque, P. & Ba ón, M. (1997). S yles o VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 46 handling in e pe sonal con lic : An obse a ional s udy. Psico hema, 9, 145-153. Mundua e, L., Ganaza, J., Pei ó. J.M., & Euwema, M. (1999). Pa e ns o s yles in con lic managemen and e ec i eness. In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic Managemen , 10, 5-24. Nau a, A., Van de Vlie , E. & Sie o, F. (1995). Dyadic e ec i eness o symme ical con lic in e ac ion in o ganiza ions. Pape p esen ed a he Annual Mee ing o he In e na ional Associa ion o Con lic Managemen , Elsino e, Denma k. Nico e a, A.M. (1994). The use o mul iple app oaches o con lic : A s udy o sequences. Human Communica ion Resea ch, 20, 592-621. Ohbuchi, K. & Takahashi, Y. (1994). Cul u al S yles o Con lic Managemen in Japanese and Ame icans: Passi i y, co e ness and e ec i eness o s a egies. Jou nal o Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1.345- 1.366. Olekalns, M, Smi h, P.L. & Walsh, T (1996). The p o- cess o nego ia ing: S a egy and iming as p edic o s o ou comes. O ganiza ional Beha io and Human Decision P ocesses, 68, 68-77. P ui , D.G. & Ca ne ale, P.J. (1993). Nego ia ion in social con lic . Cali o nia: Books/Cole. Pu nam, L.L. (1990). Re aming In eg a i e and Dis ibu i e Ba gaining. A P ocess Pe spec i e. Resea ch on Nego ia ion in O ganiza ion, 2, 3-30. Pu nam, L.L. & Jones, T.S. (1982). Recip oci y in nego- ia ions: An analysis o ba gaining in e ac ion. Communica ion Monog aphs, 49, 171-191. Pu nam, L.L. & Poole, M.S. (1987). Con lic and Nego ia ion. In F.M. Jablin., L.L. Pu nam, K.H. Robe s & L.W. Po e (Eds). Handbook o O ganiza ional Communica ion (pp. 549-599). Newbu y Pa k, C.A: Sage. Rahim, M.A. & Bonoma, T.V. (1979). Managing O ganiza ional Con lic : A Model o Diagnosis and In e en ion. Psychological Repo s, 16,143-155. Rhoades, J. A & Ca ne ale, P. J. (1999). The beha io al con ex o S a egic choice in Nego ia ion: A es o he dual conce n model. Jou nal o Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1.777-1.802. Rubin, J.Z., P ui . D.G & Kim, S.H. (1994). Social Con lic Escala ion. S alema e and Se lemen . New Yo k: McG aw-Hill. Sacke , G.P., Holm, R., C owley, C. & Henkins, A. (1979). A FORTRAN p og am o lag sequen ial analysis o con ingency and cyclici y in beha iou al in e ac ion da a. Beha io Resea ch Me hods and Ins umen a ion, 11, 366-378. Spi zbe g, B.H., Cana y, D.J. & Cupach, W.R. (1994). A compe ence-based app oach o he s udy o in e pe - sonal con lic . In D. Cahn (Ed.), Con lic in Pe sonal Rela ionships (pp. 183-202). Hillsdale, NJ: E lbaum. S e nbe g, R.J. & So iano, L.J. (1984). S yles o con lic esolu ion. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 47, 115-126. Thomas, K.W. (1992). Con lic and nego ia ion p oces- ses in o ganiza ions. In M. D. Dunne e & L.M. Hough (Eds). Handbook o indus ial and o ganiza- ional psychology (pp. 651-717). Chicago: Rand McNally. Van de Vlie , E. (1997). Complex In e pe sonal Con lic Beha iou : Theo e ical F on ie s. London: Psychology P ess. Van de Vlie , E. & Euwema, M.C. (1994). Ag eeableness and Ac i eness as Componen o Con lic Beha io s. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology. 66, 674-687. Van de Vlie , E., Euwema, M.C. & Huismans, S.E. (1995). Managing con lic wi h a subo dina e o a supe io : E ec i eness o conglome a ed beha io . Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 80, 271-281. Van de Vlie , E., Nau a, A., Giebels, E. & Janssen, O. (1999). Cons uc i e con lic a wo k. Jou nal o O ganiza ional Beha io , 20, 475-491. Wayne, S.J., Liden, R.C., G a , I.K. & Fe is, G.R. (1997). The ole o upwa d in luence ac ics in human esou ce decisions. Pe sonnel Psychology, 50, 979- 1.006. Weinga , L.R., P ie ula, M.J., Hyde , E.B. & Geno ese, G.R. (1999). Knowledge and he Sequen ial P ocesses o Nego ia ion: A Ma ko Chain Analysis o Response-in-Kind. Jou nal o Expe imen al Social Psychology, 35, 366-393. Weinga , L.R., Thompson, L.L., Baze man, M.H. & Ca oll, J.S. (1990). Tac ical beha io and nego ia ion ou comes. The In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic Managemen , 1, 7-31. VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 47