Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Process of Conflict Escalation and Roles of Third Parties

  • Chapter
Conflict Management and Industrial Relations

Abstract

Theory and practice of conflict handling by third parties present various approaches for the resolution of conflicts—for example, judicial conflict solving, arbitration, conciliation, mediation, good services, power intervention, process consultation, and so forth (Fisher, 1972; Young, 1972; La Tour et al., 1976; and Prein, 1976, 1979a). Many of these approaches may be compared and evaluated to arrive at some conclusions on the use of specific conflict-handling models for different kinds of social conflicts and different degrees of intensity of conflicts. However, what are different degrees of intensity? Which approach is appropriate for which degree of escalation? To answer these questions, this paper will present a model of escalation of social conflicts within organizations. The model of escalation describes various mechanisms at work and distinguishes nine different stages of escalation. Different strategies of conflict handling then are related to these nine different stages of escalation, and the relative value of conflict-handling interventions is discussed in light of the nine stages of escalation. The evaluation of these approaches suggests that all of them do have limited use and effect for specific stages but must be applied according to the degree of intensity of conflict.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Argyle, M. 1975. Bodily Communication. London: International University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Assagioli, R. 1971. Psychosynthesis. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Assagioli, R. 1973. The Act of Will. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aubert, V. 1963. “Competition and Dissensus: Two Types of Conflict and of Conflict Resolution.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 7:26–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckhard, R. 1969. “The Confrontation Meeting.” In W. Bennis, K. Benne, and R. Chin, eds., The Planning of Change. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, R., and J. S. Mouton. 1961. “Comprehension of Own and of Outgroup Positions under Intergroup Competition.” Journal of Conflict Resolution: 304–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, R., and J. S. Mouton. 1962. “The Influence of Competitively Vested Interests on Judgments.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 6:149–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake, R., H. A. Shepard, and J. S. Mouton. 1964. Managing Intergroup Conflict in Industry. Houston: Gulf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boszormenyi-Nagy, J., and J. L. Framo. 1965. Intensive Family Therapy. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K. E. 1957. “Organization and Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 1:122–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bugental, D. E., J. W. Kaswan, and L. R. Love. 1970. “Perception of Contradictory Meanings Conveyed by Verbal and Nonverbal Channels.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 16:647–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. W. 1969. Conflict and Communication. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase, S. 1951. Roads to Agreement. New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cofer, C. N., and M. H. Appley. 1964. Motivation: Theory and Research. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daim, W. 1962 “Das Bild des Feindes.” Der Christ in der Welt: 124–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, K. 1968. “Threats and Deterrence as Mixed-Motive Games.” The Analysis of International Relations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. 1973. The Resolution of Conflict. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M., and R. M. Krauss. 1962. “Studies of Interpersonal Bargaining.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 6:52–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diesig, P. 1961. “Bargaining Strategy and Union-Management Relationships.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 5:369–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, A. 1957. “The Peaceful Settlement of Industrial and Intergroup Disputes.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 1:69–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eiseman, J. W. 1978. “Reconciling ‘Incompatible Positions.’ ” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 11:133–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., and W. V. Friesen. 1969. “Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception.” Psychiatry 31:88–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ephron, L. R. 1961. “Group Conflict in Organizations: A Critical Appraisal of Recent Theories.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology 6:53–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filley, A. C, 1975. Interpersonal Conflict Resolution. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman,

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. J. 1972. “Third-Party Consultation: A Method for the Study and Resolution of Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 16:67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frei, D. 1970. Kriegsverhütung und Friedenssicherung. Frauenfeld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galtung, J. 1973. “Institutionalisierte Konfliktlösung.” In W. L. Bühl, ed., Strategie des Konfliktes. Munich, pp. 113–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. 1974 “Bedingungen für den Erfolg von Degradierungszeremonien.” Gruppendynamik (April).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelner, C. 1967. Die Kunst des Verhandeins. Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasl, F. 1969. “Techniken der Konfliktlösung.” Der Christ in der Welt (September).

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasl, F. 1972. “Methods of Conflict-Solving.” Seminar Papers of NPI, Zeist/Johannesburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasl, F. 1980. Konfliktmanagement: Diagnose und Behandlung von Konflikten in Organisationen. Bern.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. 1955. “On Face-Work.” Psychiatry 18:211–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guetzkow, H., and J. Gyr. 1954. “An Analysis of Conflict in Decision-Making Groups.” Human Relations 7:367–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. 1971. “Role Negotiation: A Tough Minded Approach to Team Development.” In W. Burke and H. Hornstein, eds., The Social Technology of Organization Development, San Francisco: University Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hentig, H. von. 1965. Der Friedensschluss. Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, C. F. 1973. International Crisis: Insights from Behavioral Research. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, S. M., and M. Korenich. 1977. Authentic Management: A Gestalt Orientation to Organizations and Their Development. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoesel, A. F. G. van. 1957. Zindelijk denken. Bilthoven/Antwerpen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holsti, O. R. 1970. “Individual Differences in ‘Definition of the Situation.’ ” Journal of Conflict Resolution 14:303–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsti, O. R., R. A. Brody, and R. C. North. 1964. “Measuring Effect and Action in International Reaction Models: Empirical Materials from the 1962 Cuban Crisis.” Journal of Peace Research 7:170–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I. L. 1972. Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, H. 1965. On Escalation: Metaphors and Scenarios. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kautsky, J. H. 1965. “Myth, Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, and Symbolic Reassurance in the East-West Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 9:1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. C. 1972. “The Problem-Solving Workshop in Conflict Resolution.” In R. L. Merritt, ed., Communication in International Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Tour, S., et al. 1976. “Some Determinants of Preference for Models of Conflict Resolution.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 20:319–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., and H. A. Simon. 1958. Organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margerison, Ch., and M. Leary. 1975. Managing Industrial Conflicts: The Mediator’s Role. Bradford, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mastenbroek, W. F. G. 1979. “Conflicthantering: een procesbenadering.” M & O, Tijdschrift voor organisatiekunde en sociaal beleid (Jan/Feb):69–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehrabian, A. 1972. Nonverbal Communication. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milburn, Th. W. 1977. “The Nature of Threat.” Journal of Social Issues 33:126–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. R. 1947. “Autistic Hostility and Social Reality.” Human Relations 7:69–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paige, G. D. 1969. The Korean Decision. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perls, F. 1975. Legacy from Fritz. Palo Alto, Calif.: Science & Behavior Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, E. 1952. Conciliation in Action. New London, Conn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, E. 1955. Strategy and Tactics in Labor Negotiations. New London, Conn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pondy, L. R. 1967. “Organizational Conflict: Concepts and Methods.” Administrative Science Quarterly 72:296–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prein, H. C. M. 1979a. “Rollen van een derde partij bij conflicthantering.” M & O, Tijdschrift voor organisatiekunde en sociaal beleid (Jan/Feb): 100–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prein, H. C. M. 1979b. “De rol van procesbegeleider.” M & O, Tijdschrift voor organisatiekunde en sociaal beleid (Jan/Feb): 125–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prein, H. C. M. 1979c. “De rol van bemiddelaar.” M & O, Tijdschrift voor organisatiekunde en sociaal beleid (Jan/Feb): 135–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proxmire, W. 1970. Report from Wasteland. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. 1972. “Kataklysmische und strategische Konfliktmodelle.” In W. Bühl, ed., Strategie des Konfliktes. Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. 1974. Conflict in Man-Made Environment. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathjens, G. W. 1969. “The Dynamics of the Arms Race.” Scientific American 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehmus, Ch. M. 1953. “Mediation and Conciliation.” Labor Law Journal 4:141–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, H. E. 1967. Eltern, Kind und Neurose. Reinbek bei Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, H. E. 1972. Patient Familie. Reinbek bei Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocheblave-Spenlé, A. M. 1973. Psychologie des Konflikts. Freiburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rother, W. 1976. Die Kunst des Streitens. Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, Th. C. 1957. “Bargaining, Communication and Limited War.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 7:19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senghaas, D. 1970. “Bedrohungs vor Stellungen und Drohstrategien in den internationalen Beziehungen, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Abschreckungspolitik.” In Papiere des Kolloquiums “Bedrohvorstellungen als Faktor der internationalen Politik” der Arbeitsgemeinschaf t für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung. Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senghaas, D. 1971. Aggressivität und kollektive Gewalt. Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M., ed. 1962. Intergroup Relations and Leadership. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siemens Autorenteam. 1974. Organisationsplanung. Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, H. 1954. Dynamics of Groups at Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thierry, Hk. 1977. Organisatie van tegenstellingen. Assen/Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. 1976. “Conflict and Conflict/Management.” In M. D. Dunnette, ed., Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, R. E. 1969. Interpersonal Peacemaking: Confrontations and Third-Party Consultations. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watzlawick, P., J. H. Beavin, and D. D. Jackson. 1968. Pragmatics of Human Communication. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. K. 1965. “Images in the Context of International Conflict: Soviet Perceptions of the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.” In H. C. Kelman, ed., International Behavior. New York: Irvington.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. K. 1966. “Misperception as a Cause of Two World Wars.” Journal of Social Issues 22:1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, Q. 1965. “The Escalation of International Conflicts.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 9:434–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, O. 1972. “Intermediaries: Additional Thoughts on Third Parties.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 16:51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Friedrich Glasl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Nijenrode, The Netherlands School of Business, The Netherlands

    Gerard B. J. Bomers

  2. University of Washington, USA

    Richard B. Peterson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1982 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Glasl, F. (1982). The Process of Conflict Escalation and Roles of Third Parties. In: Bomers, G.B.J., Peterson, R.B. (eds) Conflict Management and Industrial Relations. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1132-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1132-6_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-017-1134-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1132-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation