UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT AVOIDANCE: RELATIONSHIP, MOTIVATIONS, ACTIONS, AND CONSEQUENCES

By Dean Tjosvold, Haifa F. Sun. 2002

155 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/adf5e0dfb9649934135536b9a9693c9a8d09d95b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Constructively managing conflicts in organizations (2014, background): “…approaches, research that investigates the conditions and dynamics of individual strategies, such as the win– lose and avoidance approaches, may be more useful for developing our understanding of when they are effective (Peng & Tjosvold 2011; Tjosvold & Sun 2002; Tjosvold et al. 2003, 2006a).”
An expectancy model of Chinese–American differences in conflict-avoiding (2006, background): “The more cooperative the goal (Tjosvold and Sun, 2002), and the more reasonable the other person (Morris et al., 2004), the less likely it is that being direct will hurt the relationship, making avoiding less necessary.”
Cross-cultural organizational behavior. (2007, background): “Tjosvold & Sun (2002) showed that there are a wide range of motives and strategies for avoidance in East Asian cultures, ranging from passive strategies to highly proactive strategies that often involve working through third parties (see also Tinsley & Brett 2001).”
A Multilevel View of Intragroup Conflict (2008, background): “Tjosvold and Sun (2002) found that a prior positive relationship between the parties reduced the tendency to be confrontational in conflicting situations.”
Passive responses to interpersonal conflict at work amplify employee strain (2009, background): “…research for example suggest that at times avoidance might be the most adequate response (e.g., Murnighan & Conlon, 1991) and in collectivist societies like China, where relationships are highly valued, avoiding interpersonal conflict is considered an appropriate strategy (Tjosvold & Sun, 2002).”
Harmony and Conflict: A Cross-Cultural Investigation in China and Australia (2011, background): “As many authors have noted (e.g., Friedman et al., 2006; Tjosvold & Sun, 2002), Chinese are well aware of the benefits of conflict avoidance in preserving an interpersonal relationship.”