Dual Concern Model

Similar to studies of integrative and dis­tributive negotiation, the dual concern model focused on styles of conflict management. Originally developed by Blake and Mouton (1964) and refined through Kilmann and Thomas’s (1977) MODE instrument, this approach focused on five classic styles or pre­dispositions for managing conflict.

The dual concern model influenced research in interpersonal, organizational, and intercul- tural conflict. Specifically, variations of the model shaped the development and refine­ment of communication-oriented conflict style scales (Nicotera, 1993, 1994; Putnam & Wilson, 1982; Riggs, 1983; Ross & DeWine, 1988). Several of these self-report measures clustered conflict tactics into three categories that paralleled integrative, distributive, and avoidance patterns (Putnam & Wilson, 1982; Ross & DeWine, 1988; Sillars et al., 1982) and were tailored for studies of communica­tion competencies in conflicts (Canary & Cupach, 1988; Canary & Spitzberg, 1990; Papa & Canary, 1995).

Over time, communication scholars added emotional valence to the two dimensions (Nicotera, 1993, 1994)—covert and hidden tactics (Morrill & Thomas, 1992) and initial and follow-up strategies (Conrad, 1991). In intercultural settings, surveys of conflict styles provided a basis for comparing orientations to conflict across cultures (Cai & Fink, 2002; Lee & Rogan, 1991; Ting-Toomey et al., 1991) and revealed that particular styles evoked different meanings in Eastern and Western cultures.

Overall, the dual concern model and the work on conflict styles advanced research on communication and conflict. Although widely used as an index of strategies, this approach did not examine the actual ongoing interac­tions that were so vital to understanding conflict (Canary et al., 1995). Even though communication researchers have modified aspects of the original model, scholars have not developed full-scale alternative models to replace this approach.