CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

10. THE ROLE OF THIRD PARTIES/MEDIATION IN MANAGING CONFLICT 309
1983). Additionally, research suggested that the power balance between
the disputants influences strategy choice (Sheppard et al., 1986). Laskewitz,
Van de Vliert, and De Dreu (1994) tried to determine whether a mediator’s
decision to choose sides was a function of the power differential between
the disputants. They found that mediators tend to side with the less powerful
party only when both parties have the same abilities to sanction
the mediator. When the stronger party also has more power to sanction
the mediator, the mediator sides with the stronger disputant. Hence, the
propensity to balance the power between both disputants is moderated
by the self-interest of the mediator. Furthermore, outcomes appear to be
affected by the power balance of the disputants and what the mediator
asks them to consider. Specifically, Arunachalam, Lytle, and Wall (2001)
found that, when the mediator suggested to the powerful party he or she
should show concern for the weaker party, this reduced the powerful party’s
outcomes. For weaker parties, this suggestion increased the outcomes.
However, no interaction was found with regard to joint outcomes. These
finding would suggest that it might not always be beneficial to express
concern for the other disputant, especially if you are the powerful party.
But, further research should be conducted before any prescriptive suggestions
are made.
hierarchical positioning of the third party. Based on Heller’s (1971, 1981)
work, there was some indication that managers high in the hierarchy are
more willing to share power. However, this topic has not been thoroughly
examined and much more work still needs to be done.
Future Research Needs and Critical Omissions
While a “one-size-fits-all” approach may not be appropriate when
sequencing the dispute resolution system, it definitely does not seem fitting
when defining the goals of the mediation process. Specifically, with
the advent of transformative mediation, mediators that espouse this holistic
methodology are structuring their interventions to promote a healing
process that proposes not only to solve the dispute but also to morally
enhance the minds of the conflicting parties by coaching them to forgive
and accept. These are admirable objectives but lofty goals at the same
time. Moreover, one must assume that once dueling opponents are willing
to forgive and embrace the others’ viewpoint. Future research should
examine whether or not these are attainable objectives. Explicitly, under
what circumstances is transformative mediation appropriate? Are certain
disputes less likely to benefit from this technique than others are? If
so, what are they? Additionally, should both formal third party mediators
and managers use transformative mediation? From a theoretical perspective,
fine tuning the definition of third party strategies still needs to be