Conflict Management CM

On behalf of Alicia Utecht: New NCMR TOC

  • 1.  On behalf of Alicia Utecht: New NCMR TOC

    Posted 08-11-2020 15:35
    Dear Dr. Neville,
    I am reaching out to see if you would be willing to share the table of contents for Negotiation and Conflict Management Research (NCMR) 13.3 with the Academy of Management's list-serv for the Conflict Management Division.
    This special issue, entitled "Listen Then Talk: Principles and Strategies for Difficult Conversations in 2020 and Beyond," was published in August 2020 and is available at
    Ellis, D.G. (2020). Talking to the enemy: Difficult conversations and ethnopolitical conflict. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 183-196.
    Abstract: The article reviews intractability qualities and uses the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict as an example of the difficult conversations that characterize the conflict between competing groups. There are two typical research trends for analyzing group conflict. These are either a rational model or intractable conflict model. The rational model assumes that differences are over realistic issues such as scarce resources. The intractable model focuses on identity and emotions. Intractable conflicts are recalcitrant, nonrational, and particularly resistant to resolution. They generate difficult conversations. The argument here demonstrates how intractability establishes the descriptive conditions for difficult conversations about conflicts. These conditions are incommensurate cultural narratives, narrative particularity, existential threat, power differences, and delegitimization. Islam and the West and the Israelis and Palestinians are used as examples. Finally, such difficult divides must attend to five issues that ameliorate difficult conversations, namely, inclusion, maximization of arguments and reasons, controlling undue influences, dialogic equality, and the value of deliberation.
    Maoz, I., & Frosh, P. (2020). Imagine all the people: Negotiating and mediating moral concern through intergroup encounters. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 197-210.
    Abstract: Intergroup encounters can often become difficult conversations in which power relations and disagreements are perpetuated and re‐enacted through the interaction and communication between the participating groups. Thus, especially in asymmetric settings, moral inclusion and moral responsibility toward members of other groups are crucial to dialogue, conflict resolution, and reconciliation. Yet it is exactly the circumstances of asymmetry-involving threat and dehumanization-that pose barriers to the elicitation and sustaining of moral concern. Drawing on and integrating two separate research traditions-the psychology of intergroup conflict, dialogue and peace building, and communication research on "mediated suffering"-this article discusses perceptions, representations, and emotions that underlie recognition of and empathy toward the suffering of others with the aim of increasing our understanding of when and how we can be brought-through mediated and unmediated dialogues and encounters-to care about the suffering of others.
    Kugler, K.G., & Coleman, P.T. (2020) Get complicated: The effects of complexity on conversations over potentially intractable moral conflicts. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 211-230.
    Abstract: Conflicts over important moral differences can divide communities and trap people in destructive spirals of enmity that become intractable. But these conflicts can also be managed constructively. Two laboratory studies investigating the underlying social–psychological dynamics of more tractable versus intractable moral conflicts are presented, which tested a core proposition derived from a dynamical systems theory of intractable conflict. It portrays more intractable conflicts as those, which have lost the complexity inherent to more constructive social relations and have collapsed into overly simplified, closed patterns of thinking, feeling, and acting that resist change. Employing our Difficult Conversations Lab paradigm in which participants engage in genuine discussions over moral differences, we found that higher levels of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral complexity were associated with more tractable conversations. Whereas in a pilot study we examined conflicts that naturally became more/less intractable, in our main experiment, high versus low levels of cognitive complexity were induced.
    Cai, D.A., & Tolan, C. (2020). Public shaming and attacks on social media: The case of white Evangelical Christians. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 231-243.
    Abstract: In this article, we compare public shaming with attacks on social media by looking at how these tactics have been used regarding White Evangelical Christians in the United States within the current political climate. We first examine public shaming historically and then in its current form on social media. Then, we differentiate shaming from attacks and argue that this distinction is vital for understanding the goals and motives of online use of these tactics. By making this comparison, we can identify the motives and goals of using these types of posts. We conclude with considerations and recommendations about conflict on social media.
    Dorjee, T., & Ting-Toomey, S. (2020). Understanding intergroup conflict complexity: An application of the socioecological framework and the integrative identity negotiation theory. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 244-262.
    Abstract: This research article used a controversial in‐progress conflict case story, namely the Citizenship Amendment Act in India, to illustrate the benefit of using a combined socioecological framework and integrative identity negotiation theory in explaining intergroup conflict complexity. The essay is structured in four sections. First, we present a highly controversial conflict case story of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) that was recently passed in India. The real‐life case story is embedded in the nexus of multifaceted identity conflict and multileveled socioecological interpretations. Second, we introduce the socioecological (SE) framework and its essential principles and illustrative examples of the various levels of analysis. Third, we review selective assumptions of the integrative identity negotiation theory (IINT) and, together with the SE framework, analyze the CAA India case story with explanatory depth and multilevel insights. Fourth, we conclude with a summary and seven strategy recommendations that can be applied to managing polarized intergroup conflict complexity constructively.
    Eddington, S.M., Corple, D., Buzzanell, P.M., Zoltowski, C., & Brightman, A. Addressing organizational cultural conflicts in engineering with design thinking. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13(3), 263-284.
    Abstract: The present study examined how design thinking processes help to facilitate difficult conversations for fostering organizational change toward greater inclusion and equity in undergraduate engineering programs. Regardless of the type of organization or institution, sustainable diversity and inclusion integration requires difficult conversations that can correspond with locale‐specific interventions and deep cultural transformation. We led a series of design sessions with stakeholders from two undergraduate engineering programs at a large, Midwestern, research university aimed at creating prototype solutions to diversity and inclusion problems. Following the sessions, we conducted interviews with 19 stakeholders to understand their perceptions of the design process in facilitating both difficult conversations and in enacting meaningful change. Our study uncovered that organizational cultures impacted participants' perceptions of change possibilities and their role in change. We conclude with recommendations for adopting design practices and communication‐as‐design processes to create structures and interactive approaches for facilitating conversations toward inclusionary organizational change.
    If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to me and/or to Dr. Wang, NCMR's Editor-in-Chief who is also CC'ed on this email.
    I hope that you are having a wonderful day, and please stay safe and healthy!

    Alicia Utecht

    Editorial Assistant to Dr. Qi Wang, Editor-in-Chief of Negotiation and Conflict Management Research

    Research Assistant, Villanova Institute for Teaching and Learning (VITAL)

    Master's in Communication - Villanova University - Class of 2021

    Lukas Neville
    Asper School of Business
    University of Manitoba