Third party roles in conflict management in collectivistic cultures are a common but neglected phenomenon. This study surveyed 435 employees of 40 public and private organizations in Turkey. Nearly two-thirds of the respondents reported third party involvement in the conflicts they reported. Peers played a third party role almost as frequently as the immediate supervisors. Small- and medium-sized organizations reported both more third party intervention and more peer involvement in coworkers' conflicts. The initiation, timing, and style of supervisors and peers were dissimilar. While peers usually got involved from the start and on their own, superiors were invited to intervene when conflicts escalated or got out of control. Furthermore, superiors used incentives or their authority to resolve conflicts. Peers, in contrast, listened more and gave advice. Despite the authoritarian tone of administration, satisfaction with the outcome and the process of resolution was low when superiors used autocratic intervention. In contrast, the respondents saw the outcome and the process as fair when superiors or peers mediated. The frequent and informal involvement of peers in coworkers' conflicts is interpreted as a characteristic of the collectivism element in Turkish culture. Training of managers and nonmanagerial personnel in mediation is suggested as a practical method for improving conflict management in this and similar cultures. Third party role variables are recommended to be included along with conflict-management styles in future cross-cultural research.

This content is only available as a PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.