Skip to main content

Enhancing the capacity of organizations to deal with disputes

Negotiation Journal volume 6, pages 297–304 (1990)Cite this article

Conclusion

Conflict is a pervasive fact of organizational life. Enhancing members' capacities to understand their disputes in new ways, to feel free to express differences and know they will be heard, and to have multiple channels available makes for more humane and, perhaps, more productive organizations. While unlikely to reduce the frequency of disputes in organizations, dispute systems, if broadly construed, can contribute directly and indirectly to this end.

In designing these systems, however, we need to attend to the informal, behind-the-scenes, interstitial and nourishing forms of disputing. These interactions are often unnoticed and devalued in organizations. However, from a fuller appreciation of informal and formal modes of conflict management and the interplay between them comes the potential for enhancing the capacity of organizations to deal with differences and diversity. This—not prevention—is the real service which dispute interventionists can offer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Bacharach, S. andLawler, J. (1980).Power and politics in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bumiller, K. (1987).The civil rights society. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press; “Victims in the Shadow of the Law,” Signs, 12:421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burroway, M. (1979).Manufacturing consent. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coser, L. (1956).The functions of social conflict. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, D. (1989).Justice on the job: Resolving grievances in the nonunion workplace. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. H. (withSanborne, J.). (1986). “The legal needs of the poor in New Jersey: A preliminary report.” Submitted to the Legal Services Program of New Jersey, National Social Science and Law Center, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhouse, C. (1986).Praying for justice. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. M. (1989a). “Labor mediators, managers, and ombudsmen: Roles mediators play in different contexts.” InMediation research, edited by K. Kressel and D. Pruitt. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • --. (1989b). “How existing procedures shape alternatives: The case of grievance mediation.”Journal of Dispute Resolution (1989): 59–87.

  • Kolb, D. M. andBartunek, J. (forthcoming).Disputing behind the scenes: New perspectives on conflict in organizations. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.

  • Kunda, G. (forthcoming).Engineering culture: Culture and control in a high-tech organization. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

  • Martin, J. (forthcoming). “Deconstructing organizational taboos: The suppression of gender conflict in organizations.”Organization Science.

  • Merry, S. E. (1982). “The social organization of mediation in nonindustrial societies: Implications for informal community justice in America.” InThe politics of informal justice (vol. 2), edited by R. Abel. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merry, S. E. andSilbey, S. S. (1984). “What do plaintiffs want: Reexamining the concept of dispute.”Justice System Journal 9: 151–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. andSarat, A. (1980–1981). “Grievances, claims, and disputes: Assessing the adversary culture.”Law and Society Review 24: 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrill, C. (forthcoming). “Little conflicts: The dialectic of order and change in professional relations.” InDisputing behind the scenes, edited by D. Kolb and J. Bartunek. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.

  • Pettigrew, A. (1973).The politics of organizational decision-making. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. andSalancik, G. (1978).The external control of organizations. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. (1990). “Feminist theories, dispute processes, and organizational communication.” Paper presented at Arizona State University Conference on Organizational Communication: Perspectives for the 90s.

  • Pondy, L. (1986). “Reflections on organizational conflict.” Paper presented at the 25th Academy of Management Meeting, Chicago, Ill.

  • Silbey, S. (1989).Report of the Task Force on Racism at Wellesley College. Wellesley, Mass.: Wellesley College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silbey, S. andSarat, A. (1988). “Dispute processing in law and legal scholarship: From institutional critiques to the reconstruction of the juridical subject.”Denver University Law Review 66: 437–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (1989). “The movement of conflict in organizations: The joint dynamics of splitting and triangulation.”Administrative Science Quarterly 34: 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. K. andBerg, D. N. (1987).Paradoxes of group life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ury, W. L., Brett, J. M., andGoldberg, S. B. (1988).Getting disputes resolved. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1979).The social psychology of organizing. Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Deborah M. Kolb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan S. Silbey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Editor's Note: In alternating issues,Negotiation Journal features a regular column on the subject of “dispute systems design,” a concept initially proposed by William L. Ury, Jeanne M. Brett and Stephen B. Goldberg in their 1988 book,Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict (San Francisco: Jossey Bass). Brett and Ury are serving as coordinators for this column, which is aimed at serving as a forum for the ongoing exchange of ideas about dispute systems design.

Deborah M. Kolb is Professor of Management at the Simmons College Graduate School of Management and Associate Director of the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, 513 Pound Hall, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Mass. 02138.Susan S. Silbey is Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Sociology at Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass. 02181.

About this article

Cite this article

Kolb, D.M., Silbey, S.S. Enhancing the capacity of organizations to deal with disputes. Negot J 6, 297–304 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01000781

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01000781

Keywords

  • Dispute Resolution
  • Conflict Management
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Negotiation Journal
  • Wellesley College