Tactical Communication in Bullying Conflicts
A popular approach to the study of tactical communication in conflicts is Rahim’s (2002) theory of managing organizational conflict, which identifies tactics as integrating/prob- lem solving, obliging/accommodating, domi- nating/forcing, avoiding/withdrawing, and compromising.
Integrating/problem solving “involves openness, exchanging information, looking for alternatives, and examination of differences to reach an effective solution acceptable to both parties” (Rahim, 2002, p. 218). Obliging/accommodating “is associated with attempting to play down the differences and emphasizing commonalities to satisfy the concern of the other party” (Rahim, 2002, pp. 218-219). A dominating/ forcing style is associated with a win-lose orientation in which “a dominating or competing person goes all out to win his or her objective and, as a result, often ignores the needs and expectations of the other party” (Rahim, 2002, p. 220). Avoiding/withdrawing is ignoring or steering clear of conflicts and the involved parties. In compromising, parties identify and settle on a solution that is partially satisfactory to those involved but not completely pleasing to either. We adopt this formulation as it is common in conflict and adult bullying research (Keashly & Nowell, 2011) and consistent with multiple goal theory. However, we also include third- party tactics from multiple goals theory since involving others is common in bullying conflicts because of power disparities. (See Table 13.2 for summary.)
More on the topic Tactical Communication in Bullying Conflicts:
-
Conflictology -
Ecology -
Economy -
Finance -
History -
Law -
Medicine -
Philosophy -
Religious studies -