Conflicts and

cultural
differences
Chapter 17 _ Kelompok 25
Kelompok 25

01 02 03
Steven
Dafa Nizar Vena Varadita
Yehezkiel
Cahyadi
12010120130301 12010120140180 12010120120069
Concept 17.1 Understanding and dealing with conflicts

The nature of conflict

Saphiro and Kulik (2004: 177), there seems to be no comprehensive definition

of conflict because the many disciplines involved (psychology, sociology,
anthropology and communication). However, these definitions all agree on the
moment when a conflict appears when people with differing needs or goals are
prevented by others in achieving these needs or goals.
Liu (2002), this realistic group conflict theory sees struggles over (limited)
structural resources such as land, oil, gold and labour as the source of inter-
group conflict, not personal characteristics. These insights were developed by
social identity theory, whereby conflict between groups is seen to be the result
of perceived identities.
Ting-Toomey (1999) sees conflict as (cultural) groups protecting their own self-image, as
well as intercultural perceptions, which are coloured by ethnocentrism and stereotypes.
However, she sees conflict as involving not just the situation but also communicative
behaviours which are profoundly shaped by the way individuals in a culture conceptualise
the sense of self. Those who regard themselves as having an independent sense of self
‘value individualism, personal achievement, self-direction, and competition’. Those who
see themselves as having an interdependent sense of self ‘want to fit in with others, act
appropriately, protect others’ goals, and value conformity and cooperation’ (1999: 77).
Ting-Toomey maintains that both types of self-construct are to be found within each
culture, but that the independent self-concepts are to be found more often in individualist
cultures, and interdependent self-concepts are more prevalent in collectivistic cultures.
 A model of conflict styles

Hocker and Wilmot define as ‘patterned

responses or clusters of behaviour that people
use in conflict’ (1985: 96). The term ‘style’ is
being used to denote a way of communicating
that reflects not only a person’s cultural traits
and personality, but also the situation in which
the conflict takes place. A number of these
models emanate from a typology proposed by
Blake and Mouton (1964) which is based on two
dimensions defining the negotiators’ concerns:
‘concern for production’ and ‘concern for people’.
 Figure 17.1 by Thomas and Kilmann (1974) is assess how conflict-handling styles affect
personal and group dynamics. The model allows individuals to be placed in five categories on
the assumption that there are two factors in a person’s conflict style which are defined as
follows:
• assertiveness – the degree to which a person is concerned with his or her own interests;
• andco-operativeness – the degree to which a person is concerned with the interests of others.

a. low on both dimensions, then that person is an avoider, unassertive and uncooperative.
b. high on the assertiveness dimension but low on the coperative dimension is competitive.
c. an accommodating, low on assertiveness but high on cooperativeness will be concerned more
with the other party’s needs.
d. middle will try to compromise between their own needs and those of the other party,
e. high on both the assertiveness and coperative dimensions works actively to develop a solution
to a conflict in order to satisfy the needs of both parties.
f. collaborative, or integrative, approach involves attempts to reveal the underlying concerns of
the other party.
Saphiro and Kulik (2004) doubt whether it can be applied to the increasing
complexity of modern-day dis- putes. Such a model needs to take account of the
following elements:

• The parties in dispute do not always know each other. This applies
particularly to situations where organisations rather than individuals are in
dispute.
• The strategic choices for the disputing parties are not always ‘free’.
Circumstances such as previous dealings with the parties concerned,
government legislation and financial restrictions could narrow any room for
manoeuvre.
• Modes of communication used during conflict: the model assumes that
communication between the parties is direct. A number of modern-day
disputes, however, take place over large distances, without any resort to face-
to-face resolution.
 Culture, emotions and conflict

Kumar (2004) has investigated the theme of culture and emotions in

intercultural negotiations, but his findings are also relevant in general to
conflicts between cultures for which a resolution of some kind is needed.
He has adopted the definition of emotions as ‘high-intensity affective states
that stem from the focal actors’ ability or inability to achieve their goals’
(2004: 96). The nature of the goals pursued, however, varies across
cultures according to the value systems of the cultures concerned. The
greater the distance between cultures and their value systems, he
hypothesises, the more likely it is that perceived dis- similarity will cause
negative emotions to emerge, particularly when cross-cultural encounters
are ambiguous and unpredictable.
Management of conflict
The importance of conflict management increases in an international context where organisations and
people from different cultures are at work. Here, immense complications can arise whose knock-on effect
can impinge severely on an organisation’s performance. If well managed, however, conflicts can improve
relations between partners, customers and employees.
Having said that, attitudes towards conflicts can vary considerably from culture to culture, as can the ways
in which conflicts are addressed. These differences relate to:
● the degree to which disagreement is acceptable and therefore the extent to which conflict
is tolerated;
● the strategies to be adopted when dealing with conflicts; and
● the moment when the manager needs to intervene and the way he or she intervenes.

hat negotiating is essentially seen as a formalised way of resolving a conflict, a carefully managed
problemsolving process whereby a number of techniques can be applied such as:
● win–lose: the competitive approach, whereby the goals of one party are achieved at the
expense of the other;
● win–win: the co-operative approach, whereby the two parties collaborate to bring about
a resolution to the conflict which is of benefit to both.
Skills in the area of conflict management can be increased to
some extent through developing cognitive awareness as to
how other cultures perceive and manage conflict. To this end,
this concept will now examine how three countries in the
Asia-Pacific region deal with conflict.
Managing conflict in the Asia-Pacific region

The people in the Asia-Pacific region, just as in other regions, oft en come into conflict in
negotiations on issues ranging from the very specific to questions on setting up industries
or working conditions. What interests Leung and Tjosvold (1998) is that those involved
oft en have very different views as to how such conflicts should be managed. What seems
reasonable to one group can appear strange to another. Methods of conflict management
that appear natural and effective to an American can seem totally unproductive and
inappropriate to a Japanese. On the other hand, although Koreans usually prefer to deal
with conflicts outside the offi ce during social events, Singaporeans will consider a formal
discussion more appropriate. When divergent interests cause a conflict in Indonesia, social
norms requires that an individual be prepared to take second place and, if necessary, leave
aside personal interests and seek a common agreement to maintain harmony.
Malaysia
Malaysia is composed of several ethnic groups: 61 per cent of the population is
Malays (and by constitutional definition Muslim), 27 per cent of Chinese origin and
8 per cent of Indian origin. There are also other Malaysians of European, Middle
Eastern, Cambodian, Thai and Vietnamese origin. The presence of so many ethnic
groups makes Malaysia a particularly interesting country in which to examine the
management of conflict at an intracultural level.

Mansor (1998) goes on to analyse certain core values of the aboriginal Malays that
are applicable to Malaysian society generally:
● concern for face : this is of importance across all ethnic groups and is related to the
notion
of dignity, to how people see themselves as well as how they are seen by others;
● concern for others : this has to do with generosity, respect, honesty and sincerity,
as well
as being upright and caring. Malaysians hope these qualities will be reciprocated by
their interlocutors.
Thailand

Thailand is relatively homogeneous compared with Malaysia, with 85 percent of the population
speaking Thai and sharing the same culture. According to Roongrengsuke and Chansuthus
(1998), the name given to Thailand – ‘the land of smiles’ – faithfully reflects the social harmony
this country. They point out, however, that behind this collective smile hides a complex social
web in which individualism is quite predominant. The result is behaviour that causes much
confusion and disagreement among those non-Thais who have tried to do business in the country.
When conflicts do erupt between Thais and non-Thais, the causes are often to do with lack of
respect for deadlines, reluctance to take responsibility for a task, the imprecise – or tardy – nature
of information delivered, the lack of service available, in short a lack of co-operation all round.
The Thais are basically more ‘relationship-oriented’ than ‘results-oriented’.
Another aspect given by Roongrengsuke and Chansuthus (1998) is the lack
of emotion displayed by the Thai head of department. Thais have been
educated from childhood to avoid situations where they could lose face, by
neutralising their emotions and confining their problems to their private life.
This education reflects the teachings of Buddhism, the national religion of
Thailand for more than seven hundred years. Any behaviour shown in
situations of conflict that does not reflect karmic practices must be carefully
avoided. If this is not possible, then a compromise is the preferred option. In
fact, the values of the Thai culture encourage harmonious relations and
discourage open conflict of any kind.
Korea
On the basis of empirical research carried out by Cho and Park (1998: 31), four
characteristics emerge with regard to South Korea:

● Koreans prefer a non-competitive strategy in face-to-face conflict.

● Koreans prefer resorting to a higher position or authoritarian personality to
resolve conflict rather than trying to find an integrative solution.
● Koreans differentiate between in-group and out-group situations when
handling conflict.
● Koreans make efforts in managing conflict beyond those used in face-to-
face conflict situations.
Mediation and conflict transformation

This brief survey of approaches to conflict in three countries in the Asia-Pacific area
highlights the ways in which culture influences the perception and management of
conflicting objectives and incompatible ideas. One similarity is the process of mediation
by someone in the group concerned whose legitimacy rests on their social status within
the group, their knowledge of traditions, as well as their personal characteristics. By
mindfully observing and listening to the viewpoints and expectations of the parties in
dispute, the mediator can reframe the content and process issues of both parties and
transform the whole conflict in terms of the attitudes and behaviour of those involved. If
this is done, the conflict itself can be restructured to open up space for co-operation.
As Botes (2003) indicates, conflict transformation is more
concerned with the underlying causes of conflict and that this
involves carrying out transformations at personal, social and
structural level. Conflict transformation, on the other hand, is a
radical process that changes the whole nature of the relationship
between warring parties. The skills required for handling
intercultural conflicts are part and parcel of those skills which
individuals need in order to interact effectively and appropriately
with people from other cultures.
 Conclusion
This chapter has examined the way in which cultural values affect how we
perceive and deal with conflicts. It presented two models to account for different
conflict styles. The way in which emotions are experienced and expressed
according to cultural values was also explained. The role of mediation as a way
of resolving incompatibilities was considered and examples given of its use in the
Asia-Pacific region. The chapter also showed how mediation-type behaviour,
particularly ‘, can promote conflict resolution without the intervention of a third
party. In addition, this chapter also put forward the notion of cultural
transformation where by personal, social and structural factors can be
transformed through mediation and/or collaborative dialogue.
Thank
You !