Toward an "Intent" Model of Conflict Management Among Principal Parties

Abstract

The paper notes the relative neglect, within the conflict literature, of conflict management activities by the principal parties themselves. In part, this is asserted to reflect the legacy of behaviorism and experimental gaming. The authors lay a groundwork for a theory of conflict management activities among principal parties by examining the role of attributed intent within conflict episodes. A literature review indicates that attribution of other party's intent is a central activity in conflict episodes, and that these attributions play a crucial mediating role in shaping each party's reactions to the other's behavior-specifically mediating hostility and retaliation. The authors also present attributional data from executives which indicate that there are strong biases in the perception of intent-namely that individuals tend to see themselves as cooperative and reasonable, but attribute competitiveness and unreasonableness to the other party. Given their importance and ambiguity, attributions of intent are asserted to be central targets of conflict parties, each party acting both as observer to discern the other's intent, and as actor to manage the other's impressions of his intent. Elements of an "intent" model of conflict management among principal parties are discussed, including the activities of actor and observer, biases, and the importance of time lag in the effectiveness of conflict management activities.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 133 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.