Download pdf - Working With Foreign Managers

The International Journal of Conflict Management 2005, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 265-286

WORKING WITH FOREIGN MANAGERS: CONFLICT MANAGEMENT FOR EFFECTIVE

LEADER RELATIONSHIPS IN CHINA

Yifeng Chen Lingnan University, Hong Kong

Dean Tjosvold Lingnan University, Hong Kong

Sofia Su Fang Shanghai University of Finance and Economics

Given the susceptibility of cross-cultural interaction to misunderstandings and disagreements, conflict management may be especially useful for helping employees develop quality leader relationships with their foreign managers. One hundred and eleven Chinese employees from various industries in Shanghai were interviewed on specific incidents where they had a conflict, defined as incompatible actions, with their Japanese manager or American manager. A qualitative analysis of the incidents and statistical tests of the data supported the hypotheses that a cooperative approach to conflict, rather than competitive or avoidance approaches, help Chinese employees and their foreign managers strengthen their relationship and improve their productivity. Cooperative conflict management may be an important way to overcome obstacles and develop an effective leader relationship across cultural boundaries.

Keywords: Conflict management, Foreign managers, Effective leadership

Note: This work has been supported by the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China, (Project No: LU3013/01H) to the second author. Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Dean Tjosvold, Department of Management, Lingnan University, Hong Kong, (852)2616-8324, Fax (852)2467-0982-. ([email protected])

mailto:[email protected]

266 Y. CHEN, D. TJOSVOLD, AND S. S. FANG

The relationship between managers and employees has been considered critical for effective leadership, especially in collectivist Asia (Brower, Schoorman, & Tan, 2000; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; House, Wright, & Aditya, 1997; Setton, Bennett, & Liden, 1996; Schriesheim, Neider, & Scandura, 1998). For example, high quality relationships have been found to facilitate extra-role performance where employees complete useful tasks not prescribed by their own roles (Gerstner & Day, 1997; Howell & Hall-Merenda, 1999). However, cross-cultural interaction appears to have considerable potential for misunderstandings and other kinds of conflicts (Earley & Gibson, 2002; Earley & Mosakowski, 2000). Developing quality relationships may be particularly difficult when managers and employees have diverse cultural and national backgrounds. This study proposes that a cooperative conflict management approach can strengthen the relationship and work productivity in cross-cultural leadership. Specifically, it hypothesizes that, compared to competitive and avoidance, a cooperative approach to managing conflict strengthens the relationship and productivity of foreign managers and their Chinese employees.

This study makes several contributions to the research literature. It directly connects conflict management and leadership research by showing the value of conflict management for developing quality leader relationships. In response to suggestions by cross-cultural researchers (Bond, 2003; Smith, 2003), the study directly tests theory on specific interactions between culturally diverse people in order to develop knowledge that can help diverse people work together. It also demonstrates the use of critical incident methodology to study cross-cultural interaction. The study builds upon considerable research on cooperative and competitive approaches to conflict by showing that the theory, despite its Western origin and development, is useful for understanding cross-cultural leader relationships in China. It also identifies major barriers to managing conflict cooperatively between Chinese employees and foreign managers. The study develops evidence that challenges the widely held assumption that conflict avoidance is, not only culturally appropriate, but useful in Chinese and other collectivist settings.

Leader Relationship Researchers in the West and Asia have recognized that leader relationships

contribute to organizations by facilitating such issues as decision-making, teamwork, and leadership (Gersick, Bartunek, & Dutton, 2000; Gerstner & Day, 1997; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; House & Aditya, 1997; Howell & Hall-Merenda, 1999; Kramer & Messick, 1995). Quality leader relationships appear to be so constructive because they foster interaction that helps employees feel committed and motivated to contribute to the organization. Employees perform well to the extent that managers and employees develop a high quality relationship and interact effectively. Considerable research has shown that high quality relationships result in organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) where employees perform useful tasks even though they are not prescribed by their roles (Bauer & Green, 1996; Boyd & Taylor, 1998; Delugua, 1998; Duarte, Goodson, & Klich, 1994; Gerstner & Day, 1997). Research has indicated that strong relationships helped managers and employees in Hong

The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2005

FOREIGN MANAGERS 267

Kong believe that they were powerful, productive, and democratic (Tjosvold, Hui, & Law, 1998).

Researchers have argued that open, mutually supportive interaction is the foundation for effective leader relationship (Argyris & Schon 1978, 1996; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Howell & Hall-Merenda, 1999; Setton, Bennett, & Liden, 1996). However, given their power and status differences, managers and employees often find it challenging to develop constructive leader relationships (Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994). In today's global economy, many managers and employees have the additional complexity of diverse cultural backgrounds (Earley & Gibson, 2002; Earley & Mosakowski, 2000). Diverse managers and employees confront a great deal of conflict as they learn and respond to each other's values, sensitivities, and interests as they try to develop their work relationship (Adair, Okumura, & Brett, 2001; Ratiu, 1983).

Researchers have concentrated on documenting cultural differences that may disrupt the relationships that cross cultural boundaries (Hofstede, 2001). Recently though, cross-cultural researchers have suggested the limitations of this approach; knowing how individuals are apt to differ in their values only provides general assistance in facilitating productive collaboration between culturally diverse individuals (Tjosvold & Leung, 2003). Indeed, stereotypically accepting cultural differences can frustrate cross-cultural interaction (Ratiu, 1983). Research is needed to clarify the nature of the effective interaction between foreign managers and local employees and identify the conditions that foster it (Smith, 2003). Proposing that a cooperative approach to managing conflict strengthens the relationship between foreign managers and their Chinese employees, the present research contributes to the literature by empirically investigating the conflict management approaches that facilitate leader relationship between foreign managers and Chinese employees in China.

Conflict Management for Effective Leader Relationships This study uses Deutsch's (1980, 1973) theory of cooperation and competition

to identify major approaches to managing conflict: cooperative, competitive and avoidance. People tend to use a cooperative approach when they recognize their common goals and view conflict as a mutual problem that needs common consideration and solution. They have high concern for others, so that they can reach solutions of problem solving (De Dreu, Evers, Beersma, Kluwer, & Nauta, 2001). Emphasizing the shared rewards that they can receive through cooperative conflict management, people exchange their ideas, combine their positions, and develop mutually beneficial solutions.

Protagonists may also use a competitive approach as they focus on their own goal attainment and regard conflict as a win-lose struggle. With the emphasis on competitive interests, people attempt to coerce each other to do one's bidding but do not want to compromise themselves. Frustrating exchange and integration of different ideas, a competitive approach often results in a deadlock or imposed solution. Avoidance is a third alternative to dealing with conflict. The attempt to

The International Joumal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2006


smooth over conflicts and minimize information exchange communicates the intention that issues should not be openly discussed.

Research has documented that its how conflicts are managed, not conflict itself, that contributes to effective collaboration and relationships (Edmondson, Roberto, & Watkins, 2001; Pelled, Eisenhardt, & Xin, 1999). It is the approach used to manage the conflict that determines the outcomes. Although conflict has traditionally been considered disruptive, well-managed conflict can contribute substantially to relationship and organizational effectiveness (De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997). When conflict is managed cooperatively, it can help managers and employees to confront reality and create new solutions to tough problems (De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997). In managing conflict cooperatively, people have an opportunity to form and express their needs, opinions and positions, and also to understand the perspectives of others and become less egocentric (Leung & Tjosvold, 1998). Researchers have found that giving voice to heterogeneous perspectives can improve leader and group effectiveness (De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997; Maier, 1970; Peterson & Nemeth, 1996). Although research has demonstrated the positive impact of cooperative conflict management (Deutsch, 1990, 1980), the temptation to avoid and smooth over conflict is still strong, especially in Asia (Leung & Tjosvold, 1998).

Discussing conflicts productively appears to be more difficult when managers and employees have different cultures and values (Smith, 2003). Western managers might be reluctant to initiate conflict because they have been told that Chinese people, as they are collectivists, are committed to personal harmony (Tung 1991, 1982). Because they are highly sensitive to the possibility of losing social face in public, Chinese people are thought to avoid conflict so that they and their potential conflict partners need not fear disrespect and alienation (Bond & Lee, 1981; Cocroft & Ting-Toomey, 1994; Gudykunst, Ting-Toomey, & Chua, 1988). However, harmony as well as relationships cannot be imposed. The idea that people can maintain productive relationships without conflict is increasingly unrealistic (Leung & Tjosvold, 1998).

Studies have extended the cooperative-competitive conflict approach to organizational settings (Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000; Barker, Tjosvold, & Andrews, 1988; Tjosvold, Dann, & Wong, 1992). However, little research has documented the effects of cooperative, competitive, and avoiding conflict between foreign managers and local employees in China (Leung, 1997, 1996; Leung, Koch, &Lu,2002).

Based on the above literature and reasoning, this study tests the role of conflict management approaches on leader relationships. Specifically, cooperative conflict management between Chinese employees and their foreign managers is expected to strengthen their relationship and contribute to their productivity. However, competitive and avoidance approaches are expected to weaken relationships and productivity.



Hypothesis 1: Foreign managers and Chinese employees that use a cooperative approach to conflict strengthen their relationship and contribute to their productivity.

Hypothesis 2: Foreign managers and Chinese employees that use a competitive approach to conflict weaken their relationship and productivity.

Hypothesis 3: Foreign managers and Chinese employees that use an avoidance approach to conflict weaken their relationship and productivity.

Although this study argues that cooperative conflict management contributes to a strong leader relationship across cultural boundaries, it may be that Chinese employees more easily manage their conflicts cooperatively and constructively with foreign managers who generally share their cultural background. Japanese managers are also collectivists who are thought to value relationships and to be inclined to non-aggressive ways of managing conflict (Ohbuchi, Suzuki, & Hayasi, 2001). Although previous research does not provide a basis for proposing specific hypotheses, the design of this study allows an exploration of differences between how Chinese employees approach conflict with Japanese compared with American managers.

Participants One hundred and eighty-seven managers who were or had been enrolled in

MBA programs at Shanghai University of Finance and Economics who were also



working for foreign firms volunteered to be interviewed; but 76 of them were found not to have a foreign managers. One hundred and eleven interviewees took part in the interview; 55 had a Japanese manager and 56 had an American manager. Ninety-eight employees had worked with the manager for over one year. Seventy-three were males with an average age of 29.

Eighteen of the participants were managers at a beginning level, 23 middle managers, 9 accountants and finance specialists, 12 executive assistants, 18 secretaries and office clerks, 13 engineers, 12 salesmen, and 7 had other positions. They worked in various departments: 14 in financial departments, 18 in sales departments, 3 in human resources departments, 7 in production departments, 12 in executive departments, 38 in operations departments, 16 in technology departments, and 3 in other departments.

They worked in a variety of industries. Specifically, 44 interviewees were in manufacturing, 18 in wholesale, retail and catering, 12 in the finance sector, 11 in social services, 9 in transportation, storage, postal and telecommunications, 9 in information technology, 2 in education, culture, art, broadcasting, film and television; 2 in health care, sports and social welfare, and 3 in other fields.

Procedure Smith (2003) has recommended that cross-cultural research investigate spe

cific interactions to identify how diverse individuals are able to overcome obstacles and negotiate their relationship in concrete situations. The critical incident technique (Flanagan, 1954) has been considered as "an observable human activity that is complete enough in itself to permit inferences to be made about the person performing the act" (Bitner, Booms, & Tetreault, 1990, p. 73) and a particularly useful method when studying complex interpersonal phenomenon (Walker & Truly, 1992). This study applies the critical incident technique to develop a two-part interview structure:

1. The instructions informed the interviewees that the study examines how people in China deal with conflict with their foreign manager. They were asked to provide a concrete example of when they had had a disagreement, negotiation, or other conflict with this manager. Conflict was defined as whenever people's actions were interfering with or frustrating each other but did not have to mean a "war against each other" (Deutsch, 1973). To help the interviewers consider a wide range of conflicts, they were told that the example could be one where the conflict was handled successfully as well as unsuccessfully. However, they were not asked to characterize their conflicts as successful or unsuccessful. Interviewees first described the incident in detail, including the setting, what occurred, and the consequences.

2. Interviewees were asked to rate specific questions on 5-point Likert-scales to analyze the incidents. The responses to these Likert-scales items were used in the correlational and /-test analyses to test the hypotheses.



Interviewers A Chinese researcher trained three university graduate management students

in Shanghai, China, to interview in a standard, non-suggestive manner and have the interviewees describe the interaction and respond to specific questions. They pledged to protect the confidentiality of the interviewees and carried out their interviews in Chinese Mandarin. The interviews took about one hour.

As the interview structure was originally written in English, several bi-lingual researchers translated it into Chinese. The materials were also back translated. The bi-lingual researchers reached agreement on the translated version (Brislin, 1970).

Conflict Approaches Items for the approaches to conflict were developed from previous studies

(Tjosvold, 1985; Alper, Tjosvold, & Law; Barker, Tjosvold, & Andrews, 1988). (Appendix has all the items used in the study.) The cooperative approach item measured whether the protagonists integrated different views and positions to find a mutually beneficial solution. The competitive approach item measured whether the protagonists forced others to conform to their own view. The avoidance approach item measured whether the protagonists tried to smooth over the conflict. Interviewees were asked to rate on a 5-point scale (1 = Very little, 5 = Very much) their degree of agreement to the three statements. Relationship and Productivity

The relationship and productivity measures, which also used 5-point scales (1 = Very little, 5 = Very much), were developed from an earlier study (Tjosvold & Moy, 1998). The three items for the relationship scale measured the effect of interaction on the relationship between manager and employees, to see whether the approaches they used for the conflict had strengthened their relationship, and increased their confidence that they could develop quality relationships in the future. A sample item is "To what extent did this interaction make you more satisfied with your relationship with the manager?"

The three items for productivity measured the effect of interaction on future productivity. A sample item is "How much did this interaction help you feel confident that you and the manager can use your abilities effectively in the future?" The coefficient alphas for the relationship and productivity were .93 and .70 respectively, which were considered acceptable.

Results Correlations were computed and the incidents were analyzed to examine the

proposition that approaches to conflict affect the relationship and productivity. Correlations Among Variables

We used correlation to analyze the relations among cooperative, competitive, avoidance, relationship and productivity. Correlations among the variables support



the overall framework that the conflict approach significantly affected the relationship and productivity (Tables 1,2, and 3).

Table 1 Correlations among Variables

1. Cooperative 2. Competitive 3. Avoidance 4. Relationship 5. Productivity

Mean

3.15 3.64 1.94 2.92 3.34

SD

1.26 1.14 1.10 1.22 1.03

1

-.25** -.24*

.60**

.59**

2

.08 -.34** - .21*

3

-.26** -.29**

4

(.93) .74**

5

(.70)

Note: N= 111. Values in bracket are reliability (coefficient alpha) estimates. *p<.05.**p<.01.

Table 2 Correlations: American Managers


Mean

3.36 3.64 1.66 3.06 3.52

SD

1.29 1.15 .90

1.31 1.02

1

-.24 -.24

.62**

.59**

2

-.01 -.30 -.17*

3

-.11 -.19

4

(.93) .73**

5

(.71)

Note:a N=56. Values in bracket are reliability (coefficient alpha) estimates. *p<.05.**p<.01.

Table 3 Correlations: Japanese Managers


Mean

2.95 3.64 2.22 2.78 3.15

SD

1.21 1.14 1.21 1.13 1.02

1

-.26 -.18

.56**

.56**

2

.15 -.38** -.27*

3

-.36** -.32*

4

(.91) .75**

5

(.70)

Note: N= 55. Values in bracket are reliability (coefficient alpha) estimates. *p<.05 .**p<.01.



In support of Hypothesis 1, foreign managers that employed a cooperative approach to conflict strengthened their relationship (r = .60, p < .01) and contributed to their productivity (r = .59, p < .01). For both American and Japanese managers, a cooperative conflict approach significantly promoted the relationship (r = .62, p < .01 for American managers; r = .56, p < .01 for Japanese managers) and productivity (r = .59, p < .01 for both American and Japanese managers).

Consistent with the second hypothesis, a competitive approach weakened the leadership relationship (r = -.34, p < .01) and productivity (r = - .21, p < .01). These correlations held for both foreign types of managers on relationships, (r = -.30, p < .01 for American managers; r = .38, p < .01 for Japanese managers) and on productivity (r = -.17, p < .05 for American managers; r = -.27, p < .05 for Japanese managers).

In support of the third hypothesis, an avoidance approach to conflict was found to have resulted in a weakened relationship (r = -.26, p < .01) and less productivity (r = -.29, p < .01). Although the same pattern occurred for both Japanese and American managers, the correlations of avoidance with relationship and productivity were not statistically significantly for American managers. An avoidance approach to conflict weakened the relationship with the Japanese manager (r = -.36, p < .01). Avoidance and relationship were negatively related for American managers but this correlation was statistically significant (r = - .11, p = ns). In addition, avoidance was negatively related to productivity for Japanese managers (r = -.32, p < .05). The avoidance approach was negatively related to productivity for American managers but not significantly (r = -.l9,p = ns).

Incident Examples The reported incidents support the theorizing that the approach to conflict

very much affects its outcomes. The interviewees described their conflict, what happened in their work with their manager, and the approach used to deal with the conflict. An incident reflecting a cooperative approach to conflict is:

Mr. Li (names are fictitious) worked in a Japanese electronic equipment company and was the Assistant Manager of the Store Department. Their company was going to produce a new land of plastic crust for electronic equipment. As it was the first time for them to produce such crust in China, they wanted to make a good plan of material supply use. His manager was a traditional Japanese. He insisted to keep extra inventory at zero to decrease costs and only to book the material needed for production. But in Mr. Li's opinion, they could not insure that the materials would arrive just in time in China and wanted to absorb more cost in order to avoid running out of materials. He discussed this point with his manager openly and expressed his idea. The manager began by arguing in favor of a just in time system but manager became less certain as he listened to Mr. Li's argument. They agree to a one-month trial. Trying hard to have just in time inventory levels, they ordered only the material needed for the production process. But during that month, both of them were very frustrated, as they had to rush suppliers repeatedly. Finally, the manager came to talk with Mr. Li and admitted that the system was not yet practical



in China. They took a record of the material needs and kept the extras to a minimum.

Mr. Li and his manager used a cooperative approach. They were concerned about the overall effectiveness of their company. They both wanted to lower costs though they had different methods to do so. Open discussion was used to discuss and solve the conflict. Eventually, they found an effective way to adapt to their situation. They also strengthened their relationship and improved company productivity.

Chinese employees also used a competitive approach. Ms. Yao worked successfully in KZ, an America lawyer office. In January 2002, a plastic company, Yang Guang, employed KZ in a lawsuit. The defendant in the case was an electronic company in Shanghai, Yang Shen. Ms. Yao had acted as an agent lawyer of Yang Shen in May 2001 and successfully concluded the case by October 2001. Ms. Yao thought they should not accept Yang Guang, as a client because she had considerable inside information of Yang Shen. Accepting Yang Guang as a client violated a lawyer's code and would damage the reputation of KZ and Ms Yao. But her manager disagreed. He argued that her contract with Yang Shen was finished. Business was just for profit and they should take this opportunity. Ms. Yao talked with her boss but he would not compromise, as he did not want to lose the fee. No one would make a concession. Ms. Yao left the KZ; KZ won the case but lost its reputation. The results were negative for both the boss and for her as well.

Interviews also describe the effects of avoidance. Ms. Zhang worked in a Japanese electronic switch company and was in charge of all blueprints. Designers kept quitting their jobs and taking their blueprints with them; the company suffered major losses of know-how. The company CEO decided that Mr. Wang, Ms. Zhang's supervisor, should control the blueprints and authorize people to get a blueprint. However, in many urgent situations Mr. Wang was not available. Ms. Zhang suggested that she could sign as an agent of Wang if he was absent. But the CEO disagreed. Ms. Zhang thought it was a problem for the company, not her. So she did not mention it again and her boss did not bring it up either. However, the problem still existed and often staff would complain that they were wasting time because they could not get the blueprints they needed. Sometimes she was asked to be the agent of Wang; but because she was not given the right, she did not want to take the responsibility.

The interviews described 56 incidents from the American companies and 55 cases from Japanese ones. The rating scores were used in the correlational and t-test analyses. However, each incident could be classified as largely cooperative, competitive, or avoidance based upon which item achieved the highest rating. 30 cases from the American companies were examples of largely cooperative conflict, 23 were competitive conflict and 3 were avoiding conflict. In Japanese cases, 25 were cooperative conflict, 21 were competitive conflict and 9 were avoidance. These cases suggested that cooperative conflict can strengthen the leader relationship and also contribute to their productivity across cultural boundaries, while competitive conflict and avoidance weaken relationships and productivity.



After describing the incident, interviewees responded to an open-ended question to identify the difficulties they encountered in dealing effectively with the conflict. The major barriers reported involved issues of working methods, values, habits, work styles, conventions, and language. For those working with American managers, interviewees indicated working methods 16 times, values 15 times, work style 10 times, conventions 7 times, habits and language issues 2 times, and 4 other barriers. With Japanese managers, interviewees indicated working methods 39 times, values 11 times, work style 9 times, convention and language issues 6 times, habits 3 times, and 5 other barriers. In spite of these barriers, those who used a cooperative approach could manage the conflict more successfully and promoted the relationship and their productivity, while competitive and avoidance approaches were less successful. Comparisons between Different Groups

We also conducted t-test analyses regarding Chinese employees' reliance on different approaches with their American and Japanese managers. Results (Table 4) indicate that there is no significant difference between American and Japanese managers on Chinese employees' reliance on a cooperative approach (American managers, M= 3.46, Japanese managers, M= 3.12, t = 1.67, ns) nor on a competitive approach (American managers, M = 3.66, Japanese managers, M= 3.72, t = — .33, ns). However, Chinese employees reported relying more on an avoidance approach when they worked with Japanese managers compared to American (American managers, M= 1.97, Japanese managers, M= 2.23, t = -2.43, p < .05). Findings also indicate that there was no significant difference between employees' rating of their American and Japanese managers on their relationship (American managers, M= 3.06, Japanese managers, M= 2.78, t = 1.22, ns) and their productivity (American managers, M = 3.52, Japanese managers, M= 3.15, t = 1.89, ns). The major finding then is that Chinese employees used an avoidance approach more with Japanese managers than with American managers in the cases examined in this study.

Discussion Results support the theorizing of the value of cooperative conflict manage

ment between managers and employees for strengthening the leader relationship and extend this theorizing to cross-cultural settings. In particular, findings suggest that cooperative conflict management develops a quality leader relationship between Chinese employees and their foreign managers. Managers and employees that employed a cooperative approach were able to use the conflict to strengthen their relationship and to work productively. In contrast, when they relied upon a competitive or avoidance approach to their conflict, their relationship was weakened and they worked unproductively.

Researchers have emphasized the value of relationships between managers and employees for leadership and the difficulties of forming such relationships, especially across cultural boundaries (Brower, Schoorman, & Tan., 2000; Graen &



Uhl-Bien, 1995; Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994; House & Aditya, 1997). Consistent with the theorizing that cultural values very much affect the approaches, work practices, and effectiveness of individuals and organizations (Hofstede, 1980), the critical incidents from this study suggested a range of barriers—conventions, values, habits, work appetites and work methods—that can disrupt cross-cultural leader relationships. Chinese employees experience similar kinds of barriers working with both Japanese and American managers. For both, the most frequently identified barriers involved differences in work methods, conventions, values, and work appetites whereas language issues and habits were infrequently mentioned.

Table 4 Comparisons of American and Japanese Managers' Approaches

1. Cooperation 2. Competition 3. Avoidance 4. Relationship 5. Productivity

American Managers Mean

3.46 3.66 1.79 3.06 3.52

SD

1.11 0.94 0.87 1.31 1.02

Japanese Managers Mean

3.12 3.72 2.23 2.78 3.15

SD

1.04 0.94 1.07 1.13 1.02

t value

1.67 -.33

-2.43* 1.22 1.89

*p < .05.

Cross-cultural researchers (Bond, 2003; Smith, 2003) have recently suggested that maps of cultural differences and knowledge of culturally appropriate practices and approaches may only be generally useful for managing cross-cultural relationships (Jackson & Schuler, 2003; Smith, Dugan, & Trompenaars, 1996). The results of this study support their proposal to study how diverse people cope with specific events as they try to work together. Our results suggest that a cooperative approach to managing conflict is an important kind of interaction that can promote leader relationships between foreign managers and Chinese employees. Cooperative conflict management provides a framework for how to deal with obstacles and develop a strong, productive leader relationship, even when managers and employees come from different cultures.

Theorists have argued that Asian collectivist cultural values, as they emphasize cooperation, often lead to conflict avoidance; therefore, conflict avoidance is culturally appropriate and useful (Graham, Kim, Lin, & Robinson, 1988; Kirkbride Tang, & Westwood., 1991; Leung & Tjosvold, 1998; Triandis, 1990; Triandis, McCusker, & Hui, 1990; Tse, Francis, & Walls, 1994; Weldon, Jehn, Doucet, Chen, & Wang, 1998). However, this study found that the use of conflict avoidance was inversely related to leader relationship and productivity. In addition, Chinese employees who used a cooperative approach to conflict also tended not to rely on



avoidance. These results challenge traditional thinking that collectivist values lead to conflict avoidance by emphasizing cooperative relationships.

The value of open, cooperative conflict may be more consistent with Chinese traditional values than is commonly assumed. Leung (1997, 1996; Leung, Koch, & Lu, 2002) has argued that harmony motives in China can also refer to the desire to strengthen relationships and solve problems. Consistent with this reasoning, our study suggests that conflict, when managed cooperatively, can promote the leader relationship in collectivist China.

Comparisons between how Chinese employees approach conflict with Japanese and American managers were not the focus of this study and representative samples were not developed. However, results tentatively suggest that Chinese employees are inclined to use avoidance approach to managing conflict with Japanese managers compared with American ones. These results are consistent with the traditional theorizing that as collectivists, Chinese and Japanese people are oriented toward conflict avoidance. However, results also suggest that cooperative conflict management can help Chinese employees develop quality relationships and productivity with Japanese managers as well as American managers. Cooperative conflict management can help people from diverse cultures feel connected to others and believe their joint effort pays off (Tjosvold & Leung, 1998).

Theories developed in one culture cannot be assumed to apply to another (Hofstede, 1993). However, the theory of cooperation and competition, although developed in the West, proved useful for understanding conflict in leadership in East Asia (Deutsch, 1973). In a Chinese context, managers and employees that tried to resolve issues cooperatively develop their relationship whereas those that employed competitive, or avoidance ways were unable to strengthen their relationship. The research approach used in this study can both probe general theories and improve understanding of the application in non-Western cultures. The research approach of identifying conditions that impact interaction between foreigners and locals in China, with a Western theory, may be a viable addition to the traditional alternative of exploring a cultural variable with an indigenous theory (Leung, 1997). Limitations

The results of this study are limited by the sample and operations. The data are self-reported and subject to biases, and may not accurately describe the situations, although recent research suggests that self-reported data are not as limited as commonly expected (Spector, 1992). We should be careful in drawing conclusions from observed relations among self-reported variables; the findings here do not directly support causal inferences (Spector, 1992). However, respondents reported on specific events that should be less distorted and less subject to biases than questions that ask for generalizations (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986; Schwartz, 1999; Sud-man, Bradburn, & Schwartz, 1996). Interviewees had the opportunity to recount the full example before they answered specific rating questions. Recent evidence indicates that people often accurately perceive and report their social environment, especially when the purpose is for research rather than their evaluation (Balzer &



Sulsky, 1992; Murphy, Jako, & Anhalt, 1992; Spector, 1992; Sudman, Bradburn, & Schwarz, 1996). Researchers have recently begun to use interviews as practical ways to help people report past events fully with accuracy (Goodman, Fichman, Lerch, & Snyder, 1995; Yukl, Kim, & Falbe, 1996).

The study is also limited by common method problems but recent studies suggest that common method variance may not be as much of an artifact as commonly assumed (Avolio, Yammarino, & Bass, 1991; Spector, 1987). It would be useful to assess directly and compare the perspective of foreign managers as well as Chinese employees. One-item scales were used to measure some variables. More items may be added to develop the scales' reliability. Conflict intensity, duration of the relationship, cultural similarity, and other variables could have been measured to develop a fuller understanding of the antecedents and consequences of conflict approaches. Additional research using different methods is needed to test and refine the propositions argued here (Spector & Brannick, 1995).

Practical Implications The findings, if they can be replicated and extended, have important practical

implications for developing leadership across cultures. Managers and employees understand the limitations of conflict avoidance and that cooperative conflict is an investment for their relationship so that they can reach genuine harmony through open discussion and mutual solutions (Leung & Tjosvold, 1998). They can develop cooperative conflict skills (Tjosvold, 1993). They can be trained to exchange their ideas, perspectives, and feelings directly, stop defending their own views, put themselves in each other's shoes, and work together to resolve the conflict so that everyone benefits.

Reward and task systems are potentially very critical for developing cooperative goals that provide a foundation for productive conflict management (Tjosvold, Hui, & Yu, 2003). Managers' and employees' compensation could be based in part on joint success (Hambrick, 1994; Hanlon, Meyer, & Taylor, 1994; Li, Xin, Tsui, & Hambrick, 1999; Pearce, 1997). Realizing that their goal is to help each other get what they really need, they manage their conflicts for mutual benefit. Future Research

The study also has implications for future research. Conflict avoidance was negatively related to the use of cooperative approach and to outcomes, challenging the assumption that Asian values, because of their emphasis on collective, cooperative relationships, promote conflict avoidance. Research is needed to explore the extent to which collectivist values can foster cooperative and open approaches to conflict rather than conflict avoidance. An interesting finding is that conflict avoidance with Japanese managers was statistically significantly negatively related with relationships and productivity whereas those with American managers were not significantly related. Studies could explore why people with similar collectivist values would react more reliably negatively to avoiding conflict. Perhaps culturally dissimilar managers and employees are more accepting or at least less rejecting of conflict avoidance.

The IntemationalJournal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2005


Researchers have documented that demographic similarities and dissimilarities may affect expectations and interactions (Geddes & Konrad, 2003; Tsui & O' Reilly, 1989). Future research could identify gender and cultural similarities as antecedents to cooperative and competitive approaches to conflict. Studies can also investigate the effects of such variables as the intensity of the conflict and the duration of the manager-employee relationship on the choice of conflict approaches.

This study asked respondents to identify barriers to their dealing with the conflict more successfully. Future research could directly test hypothesized barriers by developing a schema based on previous research and asking interviews to chose which ones were disruptive in their incident. As the incidents revealed, respondents and their managers took a variety of actions as they dealt with their conflict and responded to each other; however, they could identify their approach as largely cooperative, competitive, or avoidance and these ratings correlated with outcomes. Researchers could directly identify the combination of behaviors that organizational members may use to manage conflict cooperatively and competitively (Janssen, Van de Vliert, & Veenstra, 1999). This study used the incident as the unit of analysis, in part because people can adopt much different approaches depending upon the situation. But studies are still needed on general predispositions of respondents and in particular how these relate to their choices in specific situations.

Results provide some support for the reasoning that cooperative, competitive, and avoidance are distinct approaches to handling conflict. Cooperative approach was negatively related to both competitive and avoidance approaches but competitive and avoidance approaches were not related. Studies could explore the relationship between the use of different approaches.

Working with foreign managers offers opportunities for local employees but also presents challenges for developing an effective leader relationship. According to Chinese employees, they were able to overcome obstacles when they dealt with their conflicts openly for mutual benefit. Then they were able to use the conflict to contribute to a strong relationship with their leader and to work productively. Contrary to theorizing that avoidance is culturally valued in China (Graham et al., 1988; Kirkbride et al., 1991; Leung & Tjosvold, 1998; Triandis, 1990; Triandis et al, 1990; Tse et al., 1994; Weldon et al, 1998), avoiding the conflict as well as trying to win was negatively related to the leader relationship and productivity. Research that identifies barriers in cross-cultural settings and shows how conflicts can be managed complements findings on cultural differences and helps develop knowledge that can facilitate productive cross-cultural interaction and leadership.

Referentes

Adair, W. L., Okumura, T., & Brett, J. M. (2001). Negotiation behavior when cultures collide: The United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 371-385.

Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (2000). Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53, 625-642.

Argyris, C, & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

The Intemational Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2006


Argyris, C , & Sch6n, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning: Theory, method, and Practice. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.

Avolio, B. J., Yammarino, F. J., & Bass, B. M. (1991). Identifying common method variance with data collected from a single source. Journal of Management, 17, 571-587.

Balzer, W. K., & Sulsky, L. M. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 975-985.

Barker, J., Tjosvold, D., & Andrews, I.R. (1988). Conflict approaches of effective and ineffective managers: A field study in a matrix organization. Journal of Management Studies, 25, 167-178.

Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1996). Development of leader-member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1538-1567.

Bitner, M., Booms, B., & Tetreault, M. (1990). The service encounter: Diagnosing favourable and unfavorable incidents. Journal of Marketing, 54, 71-84.

Bond, M. H., & Lee, P. W. H. (1981). Face saving in Chinese culture: A discussion and experimental study of Hong Kong students. In A. Y. C. King & R. P. L. Lee (Eds:), Social life and development in Hong Kong (pp. 289-303). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.

Bond, M. H. (2003). Cross-cultural social psychology and the real world of culturally diverse teams and dyads. In D. Tjosvold & K. Leung (Eds.), Cross-cultural management: Foundation and future (pp. 43-59). England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Bond, M. H., Wan, K. C , Leung K., & Giacalone R. A. (1985). How are responses to verbal insult related to cultural collectivism and power distance? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 111-127.

Boyd, N. G., & Taylor, R. R. (1998). A developmental approach to the examination of friendship in leader-follower relationships. Leadership Quarterly, 9, 1-25.

Brett, J. M. (2001). Negotiating globally: How to negotiate deals, resolve disputes, and make decisions across cultural boundaries. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185-216.

Brower, H. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Tan, H. H. (2000). A model of relational leadership: The integration of trust and leader-member exchange. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 227-250.

Cocroft, B. A. K., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1994). Facework in Japan and in the United States. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18, 469-506.

De Dreu, C , Van Vianen, Harinkc, F. & McCusker, C. (1999). Conflict and performance in groups and organizations. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 396-414). Chichester: Wiley & Sons.

Deal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate culture: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.

Deutsch, M. (1973.). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Deutsch, M. (1980). Fifty years of conflict. In L. Festinger (Ed.), Retrospections on social

psychology (pp. 46-77). New York: Oxford University Press. Deutsch, M. (1990). Sixty years of conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management,

1, 237-263. Duarte, N. T., Goodson, J. R., & Klich, N. R. (1994). Effects of dyadic quality and duration

on performance appraisal. Academy of Management Journal, 3 7, 499-521. Earley, P. C , & Gibson, C. B. (2002). Multinational work teams: A new perspective. Mah-

wah, NJ: Erlbaum.



Earley, P. G, & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 26-49.

Edmondson, A., Roberto, M., & Watkins, M. (2001, August). Negotiating asymmetry: A model of top management team effectiveness. Paper presented at the Academy of Management meetings, Washington, DC.

Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 54, 327-358. Geddes, D., & Konrad, A. (2003). Demographic differences and reactions to performance

feedback. Human Relations, 56, 1485-1514. Gersick, Bartunek, & Dutton (2000). Learning from Academia: The importance of relation

ships in professional Wis. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1026-1044. Gerstner, & Day (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844. Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange

theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1996). The volitional benefits of planning. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A.

Bargh (Eds.). The psychology of action: linking cognition and motivation to behavior, (pp. 287-312). New York: Guilford Press.

Goodman, P. S., Fichman, M., Lerch, F. J., & Snyder, P. R. (1995). Customer-firm relationships, involvement, and customer satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1310-1324.

Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219-247.

Graen, G., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 2, 219-247.

Graham, J. L., Kim, D. K., Lin, C , & Robinson, M. (1988). Buyer-seller negotiations around the Pacific Rim: Differences in fundamental exchange processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 75,48-54.

Gruenfeld, D. H. (1995). Status, ideology, and integrative complexity on the U.S. supreme court: Rethinking the politics of political decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 5-20.

Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage

Hambrick, D. C. (1994). Top management groups: A conceptual integration and reconsideration of the "team" label. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 16, pp. 171-213). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Hanlon, S. C , Meyer, D. C , & Taylor, R. R. (1994). Consequences of gainshairing: A field experiment revisited. Group and Organizational Management, 19, 87-111.

Ho, Y. D. F. (1998). Interpersonal relations and relationship dominance: An analysis based on methodological relationalism. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 1-16.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. London: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive, 7, 81-94.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49, 493-504.



House, R. J. & Aditya, R. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis? Journal of Management, 23, 409-473.

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., & 141 co-authors. (1999). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations: Project GLOBE. Advances in Global Leadership, 1, 171-233.

House, R. J., Wright, N. S., & Aditya, R. N. (1997). Cross-cultural research on organizational leadership: A critical analysis and a proposed theory. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.). New perspectives on international industrial/organizational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 535-625). San Francisco: The New Lexington Press.

Howell, J. M, & Hall-Merenda, K. (1999). The ties that bind: The impact of leader-member exchange, transformational and transactional leadership, and distance on predicting follower performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 680-694.

Hui, C, Law, K. S., & Chen, Z. X. (1999). A structural equation model of the effects of negative affectivity, leader-member exchange, and perceived job mobility on in-role and extra-role performance: A Chinese case. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 3-21.

Hwang, L. L. (1996). Conflict and Interpersonal Harmony among Chinese People: Theoretical Constructs and Empirical Studies. Paper presented in the Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan University. (in Chinese).

Janssen, O., Van de Vliert, E., & Veenstra, C. (1999). How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams. Journal of Management, 25, 117-142.

Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.

Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R. T., Nelson, D., & Skon, S. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62.

Kirkbride, P. S., Tang, S. F. Y., & Westwood, R. I. (1991). Chinese conflict preferences and negotiating behavior: Cultural and psychological influences. Organization Studies, 12, 365-386.

Kramer, R. M., & Messick, D. M. (1995). Negotiation as a social process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kramer, R. M., & Messick, D. M. (Eds.). (1995). Negotiation as a social process. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.

Leung, K. (1988). Some determinants of conflict avoidance: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 19, 125-136.

Leung, K. (1996, June). The role of harmony in conflict avoidance. Paper presented at the Korean Psychological Association 50th anniversary conference, Seoul, Korea.

Leung, K. (1997). Negotiation and reward allocations across cultures. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 640-675. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Leung, K., & Tjosvold, D. (1998). Conflict for doing business in the Pacific Rim. In K. Leung & D. W. Tjosvold (Eds.). Conflict management in the Asia Pacific. Singapore: Wiley.

Leung, K., Koch, P. T., & Lu, L. (2002). A dualisic model of harmony and is implications for conflict management in Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19, 201-220.

Li, J., Xin, K. R., Tsui, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1999). Building effective international joint venture leadership teams in China. Journal of World Business, 34, 52-68.

Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill.



Maier, N. R. F. (1970). Problem-solving and creativity in individuals and groups. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Murphy, K. R., Jako, R. A., & Anhalt, R. L. (1992). Nature and consequences of halo error: A critical analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 218-229.

Ohbuchi, K. I., Suzuki, M., & Hayasi, Y. (2001). Conflict management and organizational attitude among Japanese: Individual and group goals and justice. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 93-101.

Pearce, R. J. (1997). Towards understanding joint venture performance and survival: A bargaining and influence approach to transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 22, 203-235.

Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1-28.

Peterson, R. S., & Nemeth, C. J. (1996). Focus versus flexibility: Majority and minority influence can both improve performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 14-23.

Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531-544.

Schriesheim, C. A., Neider, L. L., & Scandura, T. A. (1998). Delegation and leader-member exchange: Main effects, moderators, and measurement issues. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 298-318.

Schwartz, N. (1999). Self-reports. American Psychologist, 54, 93-105. Setton, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Per

ceived organizational support, leader-member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 219-227.

Shraguer, J. S., & Osberg, T. M. (1986). The relative accuracy of self-predictions and judgments by others in psychological assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 322-351.

Smith, P. B. (2003). Meeting the challenge of cultural difference. In D. Tjosvold & K. Leung (Eds.), Cross-cultural management: foundation and future (Chap. 4, pp. 59-73). England: Ashgate Publishing.

Smith, P. B., Dugan, S., & Trompenaars, F. (1996). National culture and the values of organisational employees: A dimensional analysis across 43 nations. Journal ofCross-CulturalPsychology, 27, 231-264.

Spector, P. E. (1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Myth or significant problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 438-443.

Spector, P. E. (1992). A consideration of the validity and meaning of self-report measures of job conditions. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 123-151). Chichester, England: Wiley.

Spector, P. E., & Brannick, M. T. (1995). The nature and effects of method variance in organizational research. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 249-274). Chichester, England: Wiley.

Stanne, M. B., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Does competition enhance or inhibit motor performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 133-154.

Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press. Stewart, G. L., & Barrick, M. R. (2000). Team structure and performance: Assessing the

mediating role of intrateam process and the moderating role of task type. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 135-148.

Sudman, S., Bradbum, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.



Thomas, D. C , & Ravlin, E. C. (1995). Responses of employees to cultural adaptation by a foreign manager. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 133-146.

Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). A face negotiation theory. In Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theory and intercultural communication (pp. 47-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tjosvold, D., & Leung, K. (Eds.) (in press). Cross-Cultural Foundations: Traditions for Managing in a Cross-Cultural World. London: Ashgate Publishing.

Tjosvold, D., & Tjosvold, M. M. (1994). Cooperation, competition, and constructive controversy: Knowledge to empower self-managing teams. In M. M. Beyerlein & D. A Johnson (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams. (Vol. 1. pp. 119-144). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Tjosvold, D., & Tjosvold, M. M. (1995). Cooperation theory, constructive controversy, and effectiveness: Learning from crises. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 79-112). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,

Tjosvold, D., & Tsao, Y. (1989). Productive organizational collaboration: The role of values and cooperative goals. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 189-195.

Tjosvold, D., & Wang, Z. M. (1998, August). Cooperative goals and constructive controversy in work teams in China: Antecedents for performance. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Meetings, San Diego, CA.

Tjosvold, D. (1993). Learning to manage conflict: Getting people to work together productively. New York: Lexington Books.

Tjosvold, D. (1998). The cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments and challenges. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47, 285-313.

Tjosvold, D., Moy, J., & Sasaki, S. (1996). Managing for customers and employees in Hong Kong: The quality and teamwork challenges. Journal of Market-Focused Management, 1, 339-357.

Tjosvold, D., & Moy, J., (1998). Managing employees in China from Hong Kong: Interaction, relationships, and productivity as antecedents to motivation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 19, 147-156.

Tjosvold, D., Dann, V., & Wong, C. L. (1992). Managing conflict between departments to serve customers. Human Relations, 45, 1035-1054.

Tjosvold, D., Hui, C , & Law, K. S. (1998). Empowerment in the leader relationship in Hong Kong: Interdependence and controversy. Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 624-637.

Tjosvold, D., Andrews, I. R., & Struthers, J. (1991). Leadership influence: Goal interdependence and power. Journal of Social Psychology, 132, 39-50.

Tjosvold, D., Johnson, D. W., & Lemer J. (1981). The effects of affirmation and acceptance on incorporation of an opposing opinion in problem-solving. Journal of Social Psychology, 114, 103-110.

Triandis, H. C. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism. In J. Ber-man (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1989 (pp. 41-133). Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

Triandis, H. C , McCusker, C , & Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1006-1020.

Tse, D. K., Francis, J., & Walls, J. (1994). Cultural differences in conducting intra- and inter-cultural negotiations: A Sino-Canadian comparison. Journal of International Business Studies, 24, 537-555.

Tsui, A. S., & O' Reilly, C. A. (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 402-423.



Tung, R. (1991). Handshakes across the sea: Cross-cultural negotiating for business success. Organizational Dynamics, 14,30-40.

Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 145-180.

Walker, & Truly, (1992). The critical incident technique: Philosophical foundations and methodological implications. In C. Allen & T. Madden (Eds.), Winter Educators' conference Proceedings: Marketing theory and applications (pp. 270-275). American Marketing Association, Chicago.

Weldon, E., Jehn, K. A., Doucet, L., Chen, X., & Wang, Z. M. (1998). Conflict Management in US-Chinese joint ventures. Paper presented at the Hong Kong University of Sci-ence and Technology, Hong Kong.

Westwood, R, I., & Posner, B. Z. (1997). Managerial values across cultures: Australia, Hong Kong and the United States. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 14, 31-66.

Yukl, G., Kim, H., & Falbe, C. M. (1996). Antecedents of influence outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 309-317.

Appendix Conflict Management

Cooperative 1. How much did you and the manager combine the best of positions to make an

effective decision. Competitive

2. How much did you and the manager want the other to make concessions but did not want to make concessions yourselves.

Avoidance 3. How much did you and the manager smooth over differences by trying to avoid

them. Effect on Relationship

4. To what extent did this interaction strengthen your relationship with the manager person?

5. To what extent did this interaction make you more satisfied with your relationship with the manager person?

6. How much did this interaction with him make you more confident that you could work successfully with him in the future?

Future Productivity 7. How much did this interaction help you feel confident that you and the manager

can use your abilities effectively in the future? 8. How much did this interaction help you feel motivated to work with this person

in the future? 9. How much did this interaction help you feel more like quitting and finding a job

with another company?

Biographical Notes

Yifeng Chen Nancy, (Ph.D., Lingnan University) is Assistant Professor of Management Department, Lingnan University, Hong Kong. Her research interests include cooperative and competitive relationships, conflict management, leadership, and cross-cultural management. She has published a number of papers in



such journals as the Journal of Management Studies and the Journal of International Management, and given paper presentations at the Academy of Management, Academy of International Business, and other international conferences. ([email protected]) Dean Tjosvold (AB, Princeton, 1967; Ph.D. University of Minnesota, 1972) is Chair Professor, Management Department, Lingnan University, Hong Kong. He has taught at Pennsylvania State University and Simon Fraser University. In 1992, Simon Fraser University awarded him a University Professorship. He was elected to the Academy of Management Board of Governors in 2004. He has published over 200 articles, 20 books, 30 book chapters, and 100 conference papers on managing conflict, cooperation and competition, decision-making, power, and other management issues. He is an editor for the Journal of World Business, has served on several editorial boards, and is a partner in his family's health care business based in Minnesota. ([email protected])

Sofia Su Fang (Ph.D., Shanghai University of Finance and Economy, 2002) is now an associate professor at Shanghai University of Finance and Economy. She has published 50 articles in international journals and five books in China on her main research interests of insurance and risk management. She has also published on cooperation and competition and, as a teacher, is committed to developing cooperative learning in mainland China, ([email protected])

Received: September 5, 2005 Accepted after two revisions: April 8, 2006

v



