CROSS-CULTURAL STUDIES
A few studies have directly suggested that the theory is useful in cross-cultural settings. Hong Kong senior accounting managers were found to be able to lead employees working in the mainland of China when they had cooperative goals, but not when their goals were competitive or independent (Tjosvold and Moy, 1998).
They were then able to discuss their views open-mindedly; that led to stronger relationships and productivity, consequences that in turn resulted in future internal motivation.Chinese employees described specific examples of when they worked with their American or Japanese manager (Chen, Tjosvold, and Su, forthcoming). Results indicated that cooperative goals contributed to an open-minded discussion of views that led to productive collaborative work and strengthened relationships. Managers in the Hong Kong parent company and new product specialists in Canada who developed cooperative links and engaged in constructive controversy were able to develop strong, trusting relationships despite their cultural differences and geographic separation (Tjosvold, 1999). Cooperative, constructive controversy interactions were also found critical for Chinese staff to work productively and developed relationships with Japanese managers, outcomes that in turn built commitment to their Japanese companies (Tjosvold, Sasaki, and Moy, 1998). Cooperative conflict was found to help Chinese employees develop effective relationships with their Western managers (Chen, Su, and Tjosvold, forthcoming).
More than two hundred Chinese employees from various industries in Beijing, Shanghai, Fujian, and Shandong indicated that cooperative, but not competitive or independent, goals helped them and their foreign managers develop a quality leader-member exchange relationship and improve leader effectiveness, employee commitment, and future collaboration (Chen and Tjosvold, forthcoming).
Cooperative interdependence and open-minded discussion of opposing views appear to be an important aid for overcoming obstacles and developing an effective leader relationship within and across cultural boundaries (Tjosvold and Moy, 1998).Field and experimental studies in North America and Asia provide strong internal and external validity to central hypotheses of cooperative and competitive conflict. Whether protagonists emphasize cooperative or competitive goals drastically affects the dynamics and outcomes of their conflict management. Surprisingly, Chinese participants appear to appreciate others who speak their minds directly and cooperatively.
Chinese Values for Conflict Management in China
Chinese values may not be so inimical to open approaches to conflict management as traditionally portrayed. Valuing relationships is not an impediment to conflict management, and indeed, as the studies just reviewed indicate, cooperative relationships are a foundation for open, constructive conflict. Leung (Leung, Koch, and Lu, 2002) has recently proposed that harmony has two distinct motives in Chinese society. Disintegration avoidance is instrumental in nature in that the maintenance of harmony is a means to other ends. With this motive, people avoid conflict as a way to further their self-interest and avoid potential interpersonal problems. Harmony can also refer to the desire to engage in behaviors that strengthen relationships, a motive called harmony enhancement. This motivation represents a genuine concern for harmony as a value in and of itself and involves feelings of intimacy, closeness, trust, and compatible and mutually beneficial behaviors. Valuing collectivist relationships then can lead to open conflict management, not conflict avoidance.
Consistent with Leung’s argument, a study of 194 teams in three regions of China suggests the positive role of collectivist values on conflict (Tjosvold, Law, and Sun, 2003). Teams that had developed collectivist rather than individualistic values were found to have cooperative goals.
The analysis also indicated that these cooperative goals helped the teams discuss their opposing views openly and constructively; that in turn resulted in strong relationships and productivity as rated by their managers.A recent experiment supported the causal relationships that collectivist values heighten cooperative goals and open-minded controversy. Chinese protagonists with opposing views in organizations that valued collectivism, compared to individualism, were found to feel cooperatively interdependent (Tjosvold and Wu, 2005). They were also confident that they could work together and make decisions, sought to understand the opposing position by asking questions, demonstrated that they understood the opposing arguments, accepted these arguments as reasonable, and combined positions to create an integrated decision.
Experimental studies also indicate that social face concerns, when expressed by confirming the face of protagonists, can promote cooperative conflict (Tjosvold, Hui, and Su, 2000; Tjosvold and Sun, 2001). Emphasizing their cooperative goals, protagonists demonstrated more curiosity in that they explored the opposing views and were interested in hearing more of the other’s arguments. Protagonists whose face was confirmed, compared to those affronted, were prepared to pressure the other and, when they also disagreed, they experienced more collaborative influence. They also indicated that they learned in the discussion, considered the opposing views useful, and worked to integrate and accept them. A field study also indicated that confirmation of social face helped Chinese people discuss their frustrations cooperatively and productively (Tjosvold, Law, and Sun, 2003).
Chinese people have been theorized to avoid conflict because they assume that conflict requires coercion and they prefer persuasion. However, conflict can give rise to either persuasion or coercion. Persuasive influence was found to result in feelings of respect, cooperative relationships, and openness to the other person and position (Tjosvold and Sun, 2001a).
Persuasion compared to coercion helped discussants seek mutual benefit, open-mindedly listen to each other, integrate their reasoning, and strengthen their relationship.Chinese culture has been characterized as a high-context society where implicit communication is influential (Gudykunst, Ting-Toomey, and Chua, 1988). Conflict is thought to be avoided because open conflict communicates interpersonal hostility. However, nonverbal communication can help develop a cooperative context for conflict discussion. Expressing warmth compared to coldness developed a cooperative, mutually beneficial relationship with the opposing discussant (Tjosvold and Sun, 2003). Protagonists who experienced warmth incorporated the opposing view and reasoning into their decision and thinking, and were confident they could work with the other in the future.
Chinese values are not only compatible with cooperative goals and constructive controversy, they can be a valuable foundation for them. Feeling collective, sensitivity to social face and in particular giving social face, using persuasive influence attempts, and expressing interpersonal warmth have been found to help Chinese managers, employees, and partners deal with their differences openly and productively.