Negotiation support using the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution

The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution is a flexible methodology for systematically studying strategic conflicts in the real world, and is therefore a natural tool for negotiation support. The basic definitions underlying the graph model are reviewed, and the techniques for analysis and interpretation are discussed. The modeling and analysis of a case study, an international trade negotiation concerning the export of Canadian softwood lumber to the United States, are used to demonstrate the practical application of the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution as a negotiation support tool. The modeling and analysis is carried out using the GMCR software system. The ability of the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution to provide insights and advice to negotiators is emphasized.     

Analysis of the Trade Dispute of Chinese Agricultural Products and Its Countermeasures

The trade dispute of agricultural products has become one of the hot issues that international community has paid close attention to for three years. This paper analyzes the current dispute situation, the characters and the causes in international export trade. It also points out how the government, enterprises and employer＇s organizations deal with the trade dispute of agricultural products.     

Bargaining Outcomes with Double-Offer Arbitration

Increasingly, arbitration is becoming used to resolve bargaining disputes in a variety of settings. Reducing dispute rates is often listed as a main goal in designing arbitration mechanisms. Conventional arbitration and final-offer arbitration are two commonly used procedures, but theoretical examinations of these arbitration procedures show that disputants’ final bargaining positions do not converge and disagreement is likely. This article contains results from a set of experiments designed to compare bargaining outcomes under the two commonly used arbitration procedures with outcomes under an innovative procedure called “double-offer” arbitration (Zeng et al., 1996). This procedure requires that disputants make two final offers at impasse: a primary and a secondary offer. The arbitrator evaluates the pairs of offers using a linear criterion function, and theory suggests the secondary offers converge to the median of the arbitrator’s preferred settlement distribution. Because the procedure’s rules are that convergence of offers generates a settlement at those offers, this theoretical convergence result implies that arbitration is not needed in the end. Experimental results indicate that dispute rates in double-offer arbitration are, on average, about the same as dispute rates in conventional arbitration. However, other results show reason to favor double-offer arbitration. Specifically, in repeated bargaining, there is concern over whether use of an arbitration procedure becomes addictive and makes bargainers more likely to use the procedure in the future-a “narcotic effect.” The data show that double-offer arbitration is non-addictive, whereas both conventional and final-offer arbitration are.     

Deriving benefits from conflict resolution: A macrojustice assessment

Effective conflict resolution procedures serve to minimize dysfunctional effects of conflict and maximize functional effects. In the literature on conflict resolution procedures, the effectiveness of procedures has been evaluated primarily from the perspective of the individual. This article suggests that a system-level analysis of the pattern of outcomes resulting from different conflict resolution procedures is a necessary component in formulating a comprehensive framework for the design and evaluation of conflict resolution systems in organizations. The analytic questions addressed by this study concern associations between resolution procedures and outcome patterns in a system created specifically for conflict resolution within organizations: the grievance system. The pattern of outcomes was found to vary with the conflict resolution procedure. It is suggested that this has important implications for effective conflict resolution systems.     

Rock Paper Scissors

Rock Paper Scissors is used to resolve conflict when a compromise is not possible. Individuals playing ``games' tend to have biases they prefer to play. I show that Rock Paper Scissors with biased players results in a player with a high valuation for winning being victorious with a probability greater than a player with a low valuation. Thus, it frequently achieves the efficient outcome. Furthermore, as the benefit to victory increases for all players, victory for each player becomes equally likely. Therefore, it is often efficient for minor conflicts while it performs no better than a coin-flip for major conflicts.      

Amended final-offer arbitration over an uncertain value: A comparison with CA and FOA

Arbitration is increasingly employed to resolve disputes. Two arbitration mechanisms, conventional arbitration (CA) and final-offer arbitration (FOA) are commonly utilized, but previous theoretical and empirical research has found that they are unsatisfactory. Several alternative mechanisms have been proposed, but ultimately laboratory research has found that they do not offer an improvement. An exception is amended final-offer arbitration (AFOA), which not only has desirable theoretical properties but also has been demonstrated to outperform FOA in the laboratory. This study provides a direct laboratory comparison of AFOA with CA. Also, by utilizing an environment with an uncertain payoff to one of the parties, this study tests the robustness of AFOA’s performance relative to FOA. The results indicate that AFOA does outperform FOA, but that AFOA is only weakly better than CA. JEL Classification C7, C9, J5, K4     

The transformational management of conflict: A perspective from the early Christian church

An understanding of transformational leadership has been developed for many spheres of management, but not previously for organizational conflict. This paper analyzes a successful conflict mediation attempt in the early Christian church and draws from it elements of a model of the transformational management of conflict that can be applied by managers in many contemporary work organizations. The elements include (a) reframing the conflict, (b) a focus on a shared organizational vision, (c) the placement of responsibility for dispute resolution in the hands of organizational members directly and indirectly involved in conflict, and (d) the use of communication devices consistent with the desired outcome. The paper suggests skills necessary for managers to implement the model and implications for research on it.     

Introduction to the special issue on positive conflict—Conflict and employees: The right and processes to be heard

Conflict, defined as clash, competition, or mutual interference of opposing or incompatible forces or qualities, may be positive. The appropriate amount of conflict may be a delicate balance not easily achieved. Thus, a key issue is conflict management. The major charter of this special issue is the presentation of work which suggests or demonstrates that conflict can be a positive force in the modern organization. It also is pointed out that conflict, positive or otherwise, and its resolution involves a broad spectrum of inquiry into the rights and obligations of those involved in the conflict     

民事与行政争议交叉案件审理现状、存在问题及对策分析——以南宁为视角

对民事与行政争议交叉案件的审理,各地人民法院司法实务上处理不一,方式多种多样,其原因可归结为立法规定的缺失与理论研究的不足两个方面;各自为政的处理方式,带来了诸多弊端.为了公正、高效地处理好这类案件,既要借鉴他国的处理经验,同时又要构建符合中国法文化传统的交叉案件的处理机制.