東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Conflict Climates in Organizations: ...

Lowe, John Krister.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Conflict Climates in Organizations: An Integrated Decision-Making Model of Participation in Conflict Resolution Training.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Conflict Climates in Organizations: An Integrated Decision-Making Model of Participation in Conflict Resolution Training./
作者:	Lowe, John Krister.
面頁冊數:	172 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-08(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International75-08B(E).
標題:	Psychology, Social. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3618284
ISBN:	9781303864810

Conflict Climates in Organizations: An Integrated Decision-Making Model of Participation in Conflict Resolution Training.
Lowe, John Krister.

Conflict Climates in Organizations: An Integrated Decision-Making Model of Participation in Conflict Resolution Training. - 172 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-08(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Columbia University, 2014.

Little research to date has investigated the role that destructive and constructive conflict climates have on individual decisions to engage in conflict resolution interventions in organizations. One such widely employed intervention is conflict resolution training. The purpose of this dissertation was to test the influence of conflict climates on decisions to participate in conflict resolution training. An integrative behavioral intention model was formulated that predicted intentions to participate. The model proposed, counter intuitively, that both destructive and constructive conflict climates would positively predict reasons for and reasons against participation in conflict resolution training. On one hand, destructive conflict climates were expected to motivate reasons for participating in order to resolve conflicts in the work unit, yet simultaneously motivate reasons against participating due to concerns that training may lack sufficient power to effect such change. On the other hand, constructive conflict climates were expected to generate reasons for participating to build further morale while simultaneously generating reasons against participating due to concerns that the work unit might be functioning sufficiently well and therefore not be in need of training. The reason factors, in turn, were expected to predict global conflict resolution motives (i.e., attitudes, subjective norm, and perceived control). Global motives and reason factors were further hypothesized to predict behavioral intention, which in turn was expected to predict participation in conflict resolution training activities. A cross-sectional survey design was employed, involving 214 respondents in a large international non-governmental organization. Study hypotheses were tested using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Overall, the study revealed that: (1) destructive conflict climate predicted reasons for as well as reasons against participating in conflict resolution training, while constructive conflict climate predicted reasons for but not reasons against participating; (2) behavioral reasons for participating in conflict resolution training predicted the three global conflict resolution motives of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived control, while behavioral reasons against participating in conflict resolution training predicted attitude and perceived control but not subjective norm; (3) behavioral reasons fully mediated the effects of destructive and constructive conflict climates on global motives; (4) the global motive factors of attitude and perceived control predicted intention to participate in conflict resolution training but subjective norm did not; and (5) behavioral reasons for and against participating in conflict resolution training did not predict intention over and above global motives. Exploratory analyses found that destructive and constructive conflict climates interacted to predict reasons against participating in conflict resolution training. Implications of the study's findings for conflict management in organizations are discussed.

ISBN: 9781303864810Subjects--Topical Terms:

529430
Psychology, Social.

Conflict Climates in Organizations: An Integrated Decision-Making Model of Participation in Conflict Resolution Training.
LDR:04059nam a2200289 4500 001 1962905
005 20140829084627.5
008 150210s2014 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781303864810
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3618284
035 $a AAI3618284
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Lowe, John Krister. $3 2099041
245 1 0 $a Conflict Climates in Organizations: An Integrated Decision-Making Model of Participation in Conflict Resolution Training.
300 $a 172 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-08(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: James D. Westaby.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Columbia University, 2014.
520 $a Little research to date has investigated the role that destructive and constructive conflict climates have on individual decisions to engage in conflict resolution interventions in organizations. One such widely employed intervention is conflict resolution training. The purpose of this dissertation was to test the influence of conflict climates on decisions to participate in conflict resolution training. An integrative behavioral intention model was formulated that predicted intentions to participate. The model proposed, counter intuitively, that both destructive and constructive conflict climates would positively predict reasons for and reasons against participation in conflict resolution training. On one hand, destructive conflict climates were expected to motivate reasons for participating in order to resolve conflicts in the work unit, yet simultaneously motivate reasons against participating due to concerns that training may lack sufficient power to effect such change. On the other hand, constructive conflict climates were expected to generate reasons for participating to build further morale while simultaneously generating reasons against participating due to concerns that the work unit might be functioning sufficiently well and therefore not be in need of training. The reason factors, in turn, were expected to predict global conflict resolution motives (i.e., attitudes, subjective norm, and perceived control). Global motives and reason factors were further hypothesized to predict behavioral intention, which in turn was expected to predict participation in conflict resolution training activities. A cross-sectional survey design was employed, involving 214 respondents in a large international non-governmental organization. Study hypotheses were tested using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Overall, the study revealed that: (1) destructive conflict climate predicted reasons for as well as reasons against participating in conflict resolution training, while constructive conflict climate predicted reasons for but not reasons against participating; (2) behavioral reasons for participating in conflict resolution training predicted the three global conflict resolution motives of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived control, while behavioral reasons against participating in conflict resolution training predicted attitude and perceived control but not subjective norm; (3) behavioral reasons fully mediated the effects of destructive and constructive conflict climates on global motives; (4) the global motive factors of attitude and perceived control predicted intention to participate in conflict resolution training but subjective norm did not; and (5) behavioral reasons for and against participating in conflict resolution training did not predict intention over and above global motives. Exploratory analyses found that destructive and constructive conflict climates interacted to predict reasons against participating in conflict resolution training. Implications of the study's findings for conflict management in organizations are discussed.
590 $a School code: 0054.
650 4 $a Psychology, Social. $3 529430
650 4 $a Sociology, Organizational. $3 1018023
650 4 $a Psychology, Industrial. $3 520063
690 $a 0451
690 $a 0703
690 $a 0624
710 2 $a Columbia University. $b TC: Social-Organizational Psychology. $3 2099042
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 75-08B(E).
790 $a 0054
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2014
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3618284