Managing conflict at work: [611729]

Managing conflict at work:
comparison between younger
and older managerial employees
DanniiY.Yeung
Department of Applied Social Studies, City University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, and
HeleneH.FungandDariusChan
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Abstract
Purpose – Thisstudyaimedtoexamineyoungerandolderemployees’useoffiveconflictstrategiesto
handleanactualconflictincidentwithotheremployees.Withreferencetothesocioemotionalselectivitytheory, this study tests whether older employees, as compared with younger employees, would usemore avoiding to handle conflicts with supervisors but less dominating to handle conflicts withsubordinates. Moreover, this study investigates whether the interaction effect between role of theconflictpartnerandagewouldbeexplainedbygoalinterdependence.Furthermore,italsotestswhetherthe negative effect of avoiding on interpersonal relations and job satisfaction would be moderated byage.
Design/methodology/approach – The three hypotheses were tested in a sample of 280 Chinese
managerialandexecutiveemployeesagedbetween22and66years.Participantswereaskedtorecalltheirbehavioralresponsestoanactualconflictincidentwithotheremployees.
Findings – Results showed that relative to younger employees, older employees utilized more
avoiding to deal with conflicts with supervisors and less dominating with subordinates. Such agedifferences in avoiding and dominating strategies were found to be explained by cooperative andindependent goals held by the participants in the conflict incident. In addition, the negative effect ofavoiding on interpersonal relations was only shown among younger employees but not among olderemployees.
Originality/value – Thisfindingsuggeststhattheuseofpassivestrategiesisnotalwaysharmfulto
workingadults,largelydependingontheageoftheusers.
Keywords Olderworkers,Avoiding,Conflictstrategies,Dominating
Paper type Research paper
Conflictisalmostunavoidableinhumaninteractions.Unlikeotherlifedomains,wehave
little direct control over which partners to interact with in the workplace ( Daviset al.,
2009).Withagrowingnumberofolderemployeesintheworkforce,negativestereotypes
ThisstudywassupportedbyHongKongUniversityGrantCouncilunderGeneralResearchGrant
(ProjectNo.:CityU153411)awardedtoDanniiY.Yeung.
Authors’Note:RahimOrganizationalConflictInventory(FormC):Usedwithpermissionfrom
the©CenterforAdvancedStudiesinManagement.Furtheruseorreproductionoftheinstrumentwithoutwrittenpermissionisprohibited.ThecurrentissueandfulltextarchiveofthisjournalisavailableonEmeraldInsightat:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1044-4068.htm
IJCMA
26,3
342
Received17June2014
Revised26September2014Accepted23October2014
InternationalJournalofConflict
ManagementVol.26No.3,2015pp.342-364©EmeraldGroupPublishingLimited1044-4068DOI
10.1108/IJCMA-06-2014-0044

about older workers ( Hedgeet al., 2006;Posthuma and Campion, 2009 ) may hinder an
effectiveresolutionwhenconflictarises.Therefore,itiscrucialtoemployersandseniormanagementtofindoutwhetherolderemployeeshandleworkplaceconflictinsimilarways as their younger counterparts to enhance team effectiveness and workrelationships.
Socioemotional selectivity theory (SST) posits that older adults emphasize
emotionally meaningful goals to a greater extent than do younger adults (
Carstensen,
2006;FungandCarstensen,2004 ).Theemphasisonemotionalgoalsandinterpersonal
closeness may motivate older employees to handle workplace conflicts differently.Previous research has demonstrated age differences in behavioral responses tointerpersonal tensions (
Birdittet al., 2005;Blanchard-Fields et al., 2004;Charleset al.,
2009;Yeungetal.,2012)andconflictsatwork( Davisetal.,2009).Ingeneral,compared
withyoungeradults,olderadultsutilizemorepassivestrategies(suchasavoiding)andfewerdestructivestrategies(suchasdominating)tomanagetheconflict.However,thesestudiesdidnottakeintoconsiderationoftheroleoftheconflictpartner,whichmayalsoinfluence one’s selection of conflict strategies (
Nguyen and Yang, 2012 ;Rahim, 1986 ).
With reference to the age-related changes in goal orientation, it is speculated thatcompared with younger working adults, older employees would use more avoiding tohandle conflicts with supervisors but less dominating with subordinates. Moreover,with reference to the theory of cooperation and competition (
Deutsch, 1990 ;Tjosvold,
1998),thisstudyinvestigateswhethertheinteractioneffectbetweenroleoftheconflict
partnerandagewouldbeexplainedbygoalinterdependence.Furthermore,thisstudyalso tests whether the negative effect of avoiding on interpersonal relations and jobsatisfactionwouldbemoderatedbyage.
Conflict strategies at work
Conflictoccurswhenthereisadisagreementbetweentwoormoreparties(
Rubinetal.,
1994),orwhenanindividualperceivesincompatibleneeds,goals,desiresorideaswith
anotherperson( DeDreuandGelfand,2008 ;Deutsch,1990 ).Thepresentstudyfocuses
on interpersonal conflict at work, specifically conflict with supervisors, peers orsubordinates. The following review focuses mainly on conflict strategies in theworkplace, plus findings obtained from research on aging to support the speculatedeffectofageonconflictstrategies.
In the literature on conflict management, individuals’ responses to interpersonal
conflicts can be categorized into five types by the degree of attempts to satisfy one’spersonalconcernandattemptstosatisfytheconcernofotherparties(
BlakeandMouton,
1964;Rahim, 1983 ): integrating, avoiding, dominating, obliging and comprising.
Integrating is adopted when the person has a strong concern of both self and others,such as problem solving, exchange of information and open discussion to reach aneffectivesolution.Avoidingisdemonstratedwhenthepersonhasaweakconcernaboutboth self and other’s outcomes, such as withdrawal or sidestepping situations.Dominatingisobservedwhenapersonattemptstosatisfyhis/herownconcern,suchastheuseofforcingbehaviorstowinhis/herposition.Obligingisshownwhenthepersonattempts to satisfy concern of the other party, such as playing down the differencesbetween parties, accommodating and yielding. Compromising is demonstrated whenthepersonhasanintermediatelevelofconcernsforselfandotherstoreachamutuallyacceptableagreement(
Rahim,2011 ;Thomas,1990 ).343Workplace
conflictand
age

The selection of conflict strategies varies by role of the conflict partner. In Rahim’s
(1986)studymeasuringconflictstylesof1,219managers,employeesweremorelikelyto
apply obliging to handle conflict with superiors and compromising with peers. Whenresolving conflict with subordinates, they tended to use integrating as primary stylesandavoidingasbackupstyles.
Lee’s(1990) experimentalstudyalsoshowedthatKorean
managerstendedtousecompromisingwithpeers;however,theyadoptedavoidingwithsuperiorsanddominatingwithsubordinates.
DroryandRitov(1997) assessedthechoice
of conflict management styles toward a hypothetical interpersonal conflict in anorganization.TheydemonstratedthatemployeesworkinginIsraeltendedtousemoreobligingbutfewerintegratinganddominatingstrategieswhentheconflictpartnerwasperceived as having greater power.
Nguyen and Yang (2012) measured conflict
managementstrategiesofChineseemployeesinahypotheticalconflictatwork.Whenrespondentsplayedaroleassupervisor,theyusedmoredirectandassertingstrategiesto resolve the conflict with their subordinate. When they played a role as subordinate,theyweremorelikelytohandletheconflictwiththesupervisorbyutilizingindirectandharmony-preservingstrategies(e.g.avoidingtheconflictsituationorpretendingtoobeythecommandofsupervisorbutsecretlypursuetheirowngoal).Bothdirectandindirectconflictstrategieswereusedtohandleconflictwithpeers.
Findingsofthepaststudiessuggestthattheselectionofconflictstrategiesisaffected
by role of the conflict partner; however, no consistent pattern of relationship hasemerged.Ontheonehand,suchdifferencescouldbeduetoculturalvariationsinconflictmanagement;forinstance,Asiansweremorelikelytouseavoidingorcompromisingtomanage conflict, whereas Americans prefer direct confrontation or dominating
(
Friedman etal.,2006;Ting-Toomey etal.,1991;LeungandChan,1999 ;Ma,2007;Oetzel,
1998).Ontheotherhand,priorresearchonaginghasconsistentlyshownagedifferences
inresponsestointerpersonaltensions( BirdittandFingerman,2005 ;Birdittetal.,2005;
Blanchard-Fields et al., 2004;Fingerman et al., 2008), so it is also plausible that such
mixedfindingscouldbeduetotheagerangeacrosssamples.Forinstance,respondentsin
Rahim’s (1986) study are older and more experienced than those in Nguyen and
Yang’s (2012) research, as the average organizational experience of these two samples
was above 17 years and 9 years, respectively, which might have influenced theirselectionofconflictstrategies.
Giventhatpastresearchonworkplaceconflictwaslargelyconductedinsamplesof
younger employees or with a narrow age range (
Chen and Tjosvold, 2007 ;Chow and
Ding,2002 ;DeChurch etal.,2007;MartinandBergmann,1996 ;Rahimetal.,2001;Yuan,
2010),itremainsunclearwhetheryoungerandolderworkerswouldmanageworkplace
conflict with supervisors, peers and subordinates differently. The findings of Davis
et al.’s (2009)study indeed provide some preliminary support to such speculation. In
particular, based on the ratings of coworkers of the target participants, their studyrevealed that in comparison to younger workers, older workers were more likely to berated as displaying more passive avoidant responses to workplace conflict, such asyielding,delayingresponsesoradapting.Moreover,theparticipantswhoaged55yearsand above were perceived as exhibiting fewer active destructive behaviors, such asarguing vigorously and expressing anger, than their younger counterparts. However,younger and older workers did not differ in the use of active constructive strategies,suchasperspectivetakingandcreatingsolution,whendealingwithsubordinates,butolder workers used these strategies to a greater extent when dealing with peers andIJCMA
26,3
344

supervisors. On the one hand, these findings suggest that employees of different age
groups vary in their ways to handle workplace conflicts. On the other hand, they alsoimply that the use of various conflict strategies toward supervisors, peers orsubordinatescanbeinfluencedbyageoftheusers.
Nevertheless,
Daviset al.’s (2009)study solely relied on the ratings of coworkers to
assesstheuseofconflictstrategiesbetweenyoungerandolderworkers,whichmaybebiased by the age-related stereotypes of the raters. This study therefore aims toinvestigate the effect of age on handling real-life conflicts with supervisors, peers orsubordinatesfromtheperspectiveofthepersonswhousethestrategies.Inlightofthefindings of
Lee (1990) andNguyen and Yang (2012) , it is expected that compared with
younger employees, older employees would use more avoiding to handle conflict withsupervisors but less dominating with subordinates ( H1). These predictions are
consistent with the proposition of SST: in face of negative events, the use of passivestrategies such as avoidance and behavioral disengagement helps older adults toregulatetheiremotions,whereastheemploymentofdirectconfrontationcanonlyhelpthe persons to tackle the problem but cannot reduce the negative emotions(
Blanchard-Fields etal.,2004;Yeungetal.,2012).Thus,olderworkersaremorelikelyto
useavoidingandlessdominatingtomanageworkplaceconflictthanyoungerworkers.Fortheotherthreeconflictstrategies,itisexpectedthatbothagegroupswouldusethemtoasimilarextentwhenhandlingconflictwithotheremployees.
A great deal of attention has been paid toward workplace conflict in the West (see
Poitras, 2010 for a meta-analysis), with limited research in Chinese populations. Past
cross-cultural studies on conflict management suggest that Chinese employees,regardless of age, are more likely to adopt non-confrontational strategies (such asavoiding or compromising) than their Western counterparts (
Bazerman et al., 2000;
TangandKirkbride,1986 ).TheChinesesample,therefore,providesanidealcontextto
testthefirsthypothesis(i.e.whethertheuseofconflictstrategiesvariesbyageandroleof the conflict partner). The effect of age on avoiding, if found, would be quite robustbecausesuchaneffectisshowninasampleofworkingadultswithgreaterpreferencesfornon-confrontationalconflictapproaches.
Goal interdependence
Thetheoryofcooperationandcompetition(
Deutsch,1990 ;Tjosvold,1998 )stressesthat
one’s goal orientation in a conflict situation influences how he/she interacts with theconflictpartnerandthechoiceofconflictstrategies.Threetypesofgoalinterdependenceareidentified,includingcooperative,competitiveandindependentgoals(
Deutsch,1994 ;
Tjosvold, 1998 ;Tjosvold et al., 1983). Most of conflict situations are regarded as a
mixture of these three goal orientations, which influences one’s strategy selection toresolve the conflict (
Janssen and van de Vliert, 1996 ;Tjosvold, 1998 ). Individuals with
cooperativegoalsbelievetheirgoalsarepositivelylinkedtothatoftheconflictpartner.Others’goalattainmenthelpsthemtoachievetheirowngoals.Asaresult,theyaremorelikely to adopt constructive strategies to handle the conflict, such as integrating andcompromising. Individuals with competitive goals perceive their goals are negativelyrelated to that of the conflict party. Others’ goal attainment makes them less likely toachieve their own goals. Therefore, they tend to use destructive strategies such asdominatingtomanagetheconflictincident.Independentgoaloccurswhenindividualsperceivetheirgoalsareunrelatedtothatoftheconflictpartner.Others’goalattainment345Workplace
conflictand
age

does not affect their own goal attainment. Consequently, they may use more passive
strategiestodealwiththeconflictsituation,forexample,byavoidingdiscussionoftheconflictissuewithcoworkers.
According to the theory of cooperation and competition, variations in conflict
responses can be attributed to the type of goal interdependence that people hold in aconflict situation. With reference to the proposition of SST, older adults’ emphasis ofemotionalgoalsandinterpersonalcloseness(
Carstensen,2006 )maymotivatethemtobe
more cooperative but less competitive and independent with their conflict partners,which, in turn, affects their ways to handle the conflict incident. To explore theunderlying mechanism of the age by role of conflict partner interaction effects onavoidinganddominatingasproposedin H1,itisexpectedthatsuchinteractioneffects
would be mediated by the three types of goal interdependence ( H2). In particular, it is
anticipated that the age-related increase in avoiding with supervisors and theage-relateddecreaseindominatingwithsubordinates,iffound,wouldbeexplainedbyahighercooperativegoalandlowerindependentandcompetitivegoals.
Outcomes of conflict strategies
Theuseofconflictstrategieshasbeendemonstratedtobepredictiveofindividualandorganizational outcomes. In general, integrating is associated with an effectivemanagement of conflict, whereas dominating and avoiding are related to ineffectiveconflict resolution (
Gross and Guerrero, 2000 ;Janssen and van de Vliert, 1996 ;Rahim,
2011).Forinstance,clinicalemployeeswhousedavoidingordominatingstylesfeltmore
stressfulandreportedahigherlevelofrelationshipconflict,andareversepatternwasfound for those with integrating style (
Friedman et al., 2000).DeChurch et al.’s (2007)
experimentalstudyalsoshowedthattheuseofcompetingstrategiesproducedgreater
levels of task and relationship conflicts and lowered satisfaction with the conflictoutcomes. Moreover, health-care employees experienced greater psychological strainandexhaustionwhentheyhandledinterpersonalconflictspassively,suchasengagingin avoidance and yielding behaviors (
Dijkstraet al., 2009).Romeret al.(2012)further
revealedthatwhenleadersofinsurancecompaniesdisplayedmoreforcingandavoidingbehaviors in task conflict, a higher level of conflict stress was observed among theirsubordinates.Insum,theuseofavoidinganddominatingstrategiesisassociatedwitha wide range of negative work-related outcomes, such as reduced job satisfaction (
De
DreuandWeingart,2003 ;DeDreuetal.,2004),lowerjobperformance( Rahimetal.,2001;
ShihandSusanto,2010 )andpoorerpsychosocialwell-being( ArandaandLincoln,2011 ;
DeDreuetal.,2004).
Eventhoughpastresearchhasdemonstratedthenegativeconsequencesofavoiding
strategy on work-related outcomes and psychological well-being, older adults’ use ofpassive strategies is indeed consistent with their developmental goal orientation thatemphasizes on emotional goals and interpersonal closeness (
Carstensen, 2006 ;
Blanchard-Fields et al., 2004). Therefore, greater use of passive strategies should
contribute positively to their well-being, or at least has less harmful effect. Yeung and
Fung (2012) have tested a similar idea in the relationship between passive emotion
regulatory strategy and work-related outcomes. In the Western literature, the use ofsuppression as an emotion regulatory strategy is often associated with more negativeemotions but fewer position emotions (
Gross, 1998 ;Gross and John, 2003 ). However,
YeungandFung’sstudydemonstratedthatwhenolderinsuranceemployeesdisplayedIJCMA
26,3
346

a high level of emotional suppression at work, higher sales productivity and fewer
negative emotions were observed. This finding reveals a beneficial effect of usingpassivestrategiesamongolderadults.Itisthereforeanticipatedthatthenegativeeffectof avoiding strategy would only be shown in younger employees but not in olderemployees.Toourbestknowledge,suchanideahasneverbeentestedbefore.Thethirdhypothesis of the present study thus tests whether the negative effect of avoiding oninterpersonal relations and job satisfaction would be moderated by age ( H3).
Interpersonalrelationsandjobsatisfactionwereselectedasoutcomevariablesbecausepaststudiesrevealedthatbehavioralresponsestointerpersonalconflictinfluenceone’srelationship quality (
Birdittet al., 2009;Friedman et al., 2000,2006) and well-being at
work(Aryeeetal.,1999;Chanetal.,2008;DeDreuetal.,2004).
The present study
Empirical studies in the aging literature have demonstrated that older adults activelyshape their behaviors to match their developmental goals. With a growing number ofolder employees in the labor force, it is essential to understand their ways to handleworkplace conflict to promote an effective communication in organizations and toachieve high quality of work outcomes. Although SST and theory of cooperation andcompetition have received much empirical support in the aging and organizationalpsychologyliteratures,respectively,thefewpriorstudiesexaminingagedifferencesinconflict strategies in the workplace (
Daviset al., 2009;Rahim, 1986 ) did not
systematically integrate the two theoretical frameworks to make predictions. Thisstudy aims at filling this gap by examining age variations in conflict strategies withotheremployeesandassessingthemediatingroleofgoalinterdependence.Toaddresstheproblemoflowgeneralizabilityofhypotheticalconflictscenarios,whichhavebeencommonly used in prior research (
Chan and Goto, 2003 ;Friedman et al., 2006;Nguyen
and Yang, 2012 ), this study would measure the use of conflict strategies in an actual
conflict incident at work. It also investigated the moderating effect of age on therelationshipbetweenavoidingandinterpersonalrelationsandjobsatisfaction.
Method
ParticipantsThesampleconsistedof280Chinesemanagerialandexecutiveemployeesagedbetween22and66years( M/H1100542.03,SD/H110059.918).Amongthem,53.9percentwerefemaleand
66.1percentweremarried.About44percentofparticipantshadabachelordegree,31per cent had a master or doctoral degree and the remaining had secondary schooleducation. The average tenure in the current organization was 11.466 years ( SD/H11005
10.355)and79percentworkedintheprivatesector.
Procedure
Ethicalapprovalofthestudywasfirstobtainedfromtheaffiliateduniversityofthefirstauthor.Invitationletterswithadetaileddescriptionofthestudyobjectivesweresenttohumanresourcesdepartmentofpublicandprivateorganizationstoobtainpermissionto collect data from their managerial and executive employees. Twenty-fourorganizations agreed to join this study. The questionnaire package was distributed tothe target participants through internal mail. Participation was totally voluntary, andinformedconsentwasobtainedbyaskingtheparticipanttoreadandsigntheconsentform on the first page of the survey package. The interested employees completed the347Workplace
conflictand
age

questionnaire by themselves, and then returned it in a post-by-pay envelope to the
researchers.Confidentialitywasensured.AsupermarketcashvoucherworthHKD100(/H11011US$13)wasgiventoeachparticipantinappreciationofhis/herparticipation.
Measures
AllmeasurementscaleswerefirsttranslatedintoChinesebyabilingualtranslatorandthen back-translated into English by another translator. Discrepancies were resolvedbetweenthetranslatorsandthefirstauthor.
Personal conflict incident at work. To assess one’s responses to workplace conflict,
participantswereaskedtorecallareal-lifeconflictincident,withotheremployees.Theywere instructed to write a few sentences to describe a conflict incident that they hadexperiencedwithotheremployeesinthepastsixmonths.Theywerealsoaskedtoreportgenderandroleoftheconflictpartner(1 /H11005supervisor,2 /H11005peerand3 /H11005subordinate),
andtheirperceivedseverityoftheconflict(1 /H11005notatallto5/H11005extremely ).Thevariable,
roleoftheconflictpartners,wastransformedtotwodummyvariables(D1 /H11005supervisor
and D2 /H11005peer), with subordinate as the comparison group. Among the sample, 87 of
respondentsreportedaconflictincidentwiththeirsupervisor,88withpeerand105withsubordinate.Basedonthedescriptionbytheparticipants,causesoftheconflictincidentwerecategorizedintosixgroupsbyreferencingtopriorresearchonworkplaceconflicts(
Jehn, 1995 ;Pearsonet al., 2002;Tjosvold and Chia, 1989 ): different viewpoints and
opinionsaboutthetaskbeingperformed(23.7percent),interpersonalincompatibilities(20.1percent),qualityofwork(23.4percent),workscheduling(15.5percent),rigidrulesand procedures (11.2 per cent) and insufficient resources (6.1 per cent). Younger andolder employees did not differ in their report of a conflict incident with supervisors,peersorsubordinates{ X
2(2)/H110051.462,ns},sexoftheconflictpartner{ X2(2)/H110052.367,ns}
andthenatureoftheconflictincident{ X2(5)/H110052.795,ns}.
Conflictstrategies. Participants’behavioralresponsestohandletheconflictincident
with other employees were assessed by Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory-II(ROCI-II, Form C;
Rahim, 1983 ). This scale consists of 28 items to assess five conflict
strategieswithcolleagues,includingavoiding(sixitems;“Iattempttoavoidbeingputonthespotandtrytokeepmyconflictwiththeconflictpartnertomyself”),dominating(fiveitems;“Iusemyinfluencetogetmyideasaccepted”),integrating(sevenitems”;“Itry to integrate my ideas with those of the conflict partner to come up with a solutionacceptabletous”),compromising(fouritems;“Itrytofindamiddlecoursetoresolveanimpasse”) and obliging (six items; “I generally try to satisfy the needs of the conflictpartner”).Thisscalehasbeenshowntohavehighinternalconsistencyandtest–retestreliability (
DeChurch et al., 2007;Rahim, 1983 ). Permission to use this instrument was
obtainedfromtheCenterforAdvancedStudiesinManagement.Participantsratedtheseitems on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 /H11005strongly disagree to 5/H11005strongly
agree,withhigherscoresindicatinggreateruseoftheconflictstrategy.TheCronbach’s
alphas(
/H9251)ofthefiveconflictstrategieswere0.700,0.820,0.862,0.606and0.915.Because
the internal consistency of compromising was not satisfactory ( /H9251/H110210.70), therefore it
wasexcludedfromthefollowingstatisticalanalyses.
Goal interdependence. Tjosvold et al.’s (1983) measure of goal interdependence was
adapted to assess participants’ motives to resolve the conflict incident. This scaleconsistsof19itemstomeasurethelinkageofgoalsbetweentherespondentandconflictpartner,with7itemsassessingcooperativegoal(e.g.“IlearnalotfromworkingtogetherIJCMA
26,3
348

withtheconflictpartner”),7itemsforcompetitivegoal(e.g.“Theconflictpartnerseems
togetinthewayofmygrowthanddevelopment”)and5itemsforindependentgoal(e.g.“The conflict partner and I work separately”). Participants rated these items on afive-pointLikertscale(1 /H11005stronglydisagreeto5 /H11005stronglyagree).Thealphasofthe
threegoalinterdependencewere0.888,0.852,and0.819.
Interpersonal relations. The positive relations with others subscale of
Ryff’s (1989)
psychologicalwell-beingscalewasusedtomeasureparticipants’interpersonalrelations
inthepresentstudy.TheChineseversionofthisstudyhasbeenvalidatedamongHongKongChineseby
ChengandChan(2005) .Thissubscaleconsistsof4items,forexample,
“IoftenfeellonelybecauseIhavefewclosefriendswithwhomtosharemyconcerns”.Participantsratedtheseitemsonafive-pointLikertscale(1 /H11005stronglydisagree to5/H11005
strongly agree ), with higher scores denoting a warm and trusting relationship with
others.Theinternalreliabilitywashigh,with
/H9251/H110050.734.
Job satisfaction. Kunin’s (1955) single-item faces scale was used to measure the
participants’ overall job satisfaction. Unlike other measures of job satisfaction thatconsisted of mainly cognitive components of job attitudes, this faces scale measureassessesbothcognitiveandaffectivecomponentsinjobsatisfaction(
Brief,1998 ;Fisher,
2000). Previous studies have demonstrated the predictive validity of this single-item
scale by showing its significant correlations with other job measures such as jobperformance(
YeungandFung,2012 ;Yeungetal.,2015)andstateaffectatwork( Fisher,
2000).Participantswereaskedtochooseoneofthesevenfacesthatcouldbestdescribe
how they felt about their job in general. Higher scores indicate a higher level of jobsatisfaction.
Demographic variables including age, gender, education, marital status and
organizationaltenurewerealsorecorded.
Results
Use of conflict strategies across age and conflict partnerCorrelation analyses were computed to show the relationships among major variables(
Table I). To test the first hypothesis, MANCOVA was conducted to examine whether
the use of the four conflict strategies would be varied by age and role of the conflictpartner,withgenderandorganizationaltenureoftherespondentandperceivedseverityoftheconflictincidentascovariates.Agewasmeasuredasacontinuousvariableinthisstudy. To assess the effect of age on conflict strategies across conflict partners inMANCOVA,thecontinuousvariableofagewasrecodedintoacategoricalvariablebydividingthesampletwoagegroups,youngeremployees(40yearsandbelow)andolderemployees (41 years and above). This categorization of older and younger employeeshasbeenusedintheAgeDiscriminationinEmploymentActandalsopastresearchonageandworkbehaviors(
NgandFeldman,2008 ;YeungandFung,2009 ,2012).
Table II presents means and standard deviations of the four conflict strategies
towardconflictpartnersbetweenyoungerandolderemployees.ResultsofMANCOVArevealedthattheagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteractioneffectwassignificant, F
(8, 536) /H110052.249, Wilks’ /H9011/H110050.936,p/H110050.023,
/H92572/H110050.032. Subsequent univariate
analyses showed that the age by role of the conflict partner interaction effect wassignificantonavoiding{ F(2,271)/H110053.236,p/H110050.041,
/H92572/H110050.023}anddominating{ F(2,
271)/H110053.189,p/H110050.043,/H92572/H110050.023},butwasnotsignificantforintegrating{ F(2,271)/H11005
1.240,ns}orobliging{F(2,271) /H110050.057,ns}.Relativetotheconflictwithsubordinates,349Workplace
conflictand
age

Table I.
Correlationanalyses
amongmajorvariables
Majorvariables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Age –
Gender /H110020.200*** –
Seriousnessoftheconflict 0.206*** /H110020.155** –
Avoiding 0.019 0.038 /H110020.011 –
Dominating 0.016 /H110020.007 /H110020.009 /H110020.029 –
Integrating 0.097 /H110020.091 /H110020.055 /H110020.145* 0.214*** –
Obliging /H110020.081 0.036 /H110020.154** 0.332*** /H110020.238*** 0.121* –
Independentgoal /H110020.013 /H110020.008 /H110020.018 0.020 0.194*** 0.375*** 0.061 –
Cooperativegoal 0.046 /H110020.022 /H110020.009 0.032 0.088 0.291*** 0.096 0.548*** –
Competitivegoal /H110020.013 0.009 0.052 0.228*** 0.121* /H110020.151* 0.056 /H110020.017 /H110020.277*** –
Interpersonalrelationship 0.093 0.004 /H110020.098 /H110020.226** 0.141* 0.237*** /H110020.061 0.063 /H110020.054 /H110020.018 –
Jobsatisfaction 0.097 /H110020.050 /H110020.034 /H110020.197*** 0.112 0.216*** /H110020.065 0.086 0.024 /H110020.032 0.301***
Notes:*p/H110210.05; **p/H110210.01; *** p/H113490.001IJCMA
26,3
350

older employees were more likely to utilize avoiding with their supervisors than were
their younger counterparts. When dealing with subordinates, older employees utilizedless dominating than younger employees.
Figure 1illustrates the use of avoiding and
dominating strategies across age groups and conflict partners. Moreover, the maineffectofroleoftheconflictpartnerwasalsoobservedinobliging{ F(2,271) /H1100518.785,
p/H110210.001,
/H92572/H110050.122}anddominating{ F(2,271) /H110053.712,p/H110050.026,/H92572/H110050.027}.In
particular,employees,regardlessofage,weremorelikelytouseobligingtoresolvetheconflict with supervisors than with peers and subordinates, whereas they tended toutilize dominating strategies to handle the conflict with subordinates than withTable II.
Useofconflict
strategiesacrossage
groupsandconflict
partnersConflictpartnerYoungeremployees Olderemployees
Mean SD Mean SD
Avoiding
Supervisor 3.119 0.689 3.433 0.747Peer 3.081 0.711 3.119 0.450Subordinate 3.157 0.603 3.031 0.598
Dominating
Supervisor 3.031 0.730 3.129 0.728Peer 3.195 0.697 3.404 0.727Subordinate 3.517 0.615 3.212 0.767
Integrating
Supervisor 3.571 0.725 3.670 0.603Peer 3.755 0.719 3.720 0.678Subordinate 3.599 0.707 3.870 0.484
Obliging
Supervisor 3.159 0.855 3.167 0.930Peer 2.586 0.847 2.626 0.753Subordinate 2.514 0.790 2.478 0.705
Figure 1.
Useofconflict
strategiesacrossage
groupsandconflict
partners351Workplace
conflictand
age

supervisors. Main effect of age group was not found in the four conflict strategies.
Gender and organizational tenure did not have any significant effect on the use of thefive conflict strategies, while the main effect of the perceived severity of the conflictincidentwasonlysignificantonobliging( B/H11005/H110020.146,SE/H110050.044,p/H110050.001).
The mediating effect of goal interdependence
H2was tested by a moderated mediation analysis, in particular, the interaction
effect between role of the conflict partner (the independent variable) and age (themoderator)oneachconflictstrategy(thedependentvariable)wouldbemediatedbygoal interdependence (the mediator) (
Preacher et al., 2007).Hayes’s (2012) SPSS
macroofmoderatedmediationanalysiswasusedtotestthemediatingeffectofthreegoal orientations on the relationship among role of conflict partner, age and theconflictstrategy(avoidinganddominating).Basedonthesuggestionof
Hayesand
Preacher(2014) ,twosetsofmoderatedmediationanalysiswereconductedforeach
conflictstrategy,eachwithonedummyvariableofroleoftheconflictpartnerastheindependent variable and the other dummy variable as the covariate in the model.The three goal orientations were inputted to the model as mediators. Age wasenteredtotheanalysisasacontinuousvariable.Allpredictorswerecenteredonthemean of the respective variable.
Tables III andIVsummarize the results of
moderatedmediationanalysesonavoidinganddominating,respectively.Theupperpartofthetablesshowsthatthemaineffectsofroleoftheconflictpartnerandageandtheirinteractioneffectoneachgoalorientation.Resultsshowedthatbothroleofthe conflict partner and age significantly predicted independent and cooperativegoals but not competitive goal. In particular, older employees were more likely toholdacooperativegoalorientationandlesslikelytohaveanindependentgoalthanwere younger employees in the conflict situation. When the conflict partner wassupervisor or peer, the level of independent goal orientation was higher, whereas areversepatternwasobservedforcooperativegoalorientation.Theinteractioneffecton each goal orientation was not significant.
Themiddlepartofthetablespresentsthemaineffectsofroleoftheconflictpartner,
age and three goal orientations and the interaction effect of role of the conflict partnerandageonconflictstrategies.Resultsdemonstratedthatroleoftheconflictpartnerassupervisorandindependentandcompetitivegoalswerepredictiveofbothavoidinganddominatingstrategies.Cooperativegoalwaspredictiveoftheuseofdominatingbutnotavoiding strategies. The interaction effect between role of the conflict partner assupervisorandageonavoiding( B/H110050.019,SE/H110050.008,p/H110210.05)remainedsignificant
evenaftercontrollingforthethreegoalorientations.Inparticular,theconditionaldirecteffectofroleoftheconflictpartnerassupervisoronavoidingwassignificantlystrongerat1standarddeviation(SD)abovethemeanofage( B/H110050.380,SE/H110050.123,p/H110210.01)and
themean( B/H110050.192,SE/H110050.093,p/H110210.05)than1SDbelowthemean( B/H110050.005,SE/H11005
0.122,ns).However,theinteractioneffectbetweenroleoftheconflictpartnerandageon
dominatingwasnotsignificant.
The lower part of the tables shows the conditional indirect effects of role of the
conflict partner on DV through goal interdependence across age. Results showed thattherewasasignificantindirecteffectofroleoftheconflictpartneronavoidingthroughindependent goal across age groups. For dominating, there was a significant indirecteffect of role of the conflict partner through independent and cooperative goals acrossIJCMA
26,3
352

Table III.
Resultsofmoderated
mediationanalysis
onavoidingPredictorsConflictpartner /H11005Supervisor Conflictpartner /H11005Peer
BS E t BS E t
DV: Independent goal
Constant /H110020.293*** 0.078 /H110023.774 /H110020.283*** 0.077 /H110023.662
Roleofconflictpartner(RCP) 0.428*** 0.116 3.705 0.502*** 0.114 4.400Age /H110020.012* 0.006 /H110022.027 /H110020.019** 0.006 /H110023.269
RCP/H11003Age /H110020.003 0.010 /H110020.314 0.019† 0.010 1.847
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP 0.506*** 0.115 4.403 0.413*** 0.115 3.586
DV: Cooperative goal
Constant 0.214*** 0.062 3.442 0.214*** 0.062 3.445RCP /H110020.288** 0.092 /H110023.116 /H110020.402*** 0.092 /H110024.374
Age 0.015** 0.005 3.244 0.015** 0.005 3.188RCP/H11003Age /H110020.003 0.008 /H110020.392 /H110020.003 0.008 /H110020.323
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP /H110020.400*** 0.092 /H110024.348 /H110020.285** 0.093 /H110023.071
DV: Competitive goal
Constant 0.033 0.061 0.547 0.032 0.061 0.527RCP /H110020.086 0.090 /H110020.957 /H110020.003 0.090 /H110020.034
Age /H110020.002 0.005 /H110020.321 /H110020.001 0.005 /H110020.137
RCP/H11003Age 0.010 0.008 1.256 0.007 0.008 0.915
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP /H110020.009 0.090 /H110020.096 /H110020.096 0.091 /H110021.060
DV: Avoiding
Constant 3.094*** 0.063 49.321 3.084*** 0.063 48.736RCP 0.192* 0.09 2.062 0.005 0.095 0.051Independentgoal 0.135* 0.055 2.455 0.128* 0.056 2.286Cooperativegoal 0.097 0.065 1.502 0.092 0.065 1.415Competitivegoal 0.173** 0.065 2.649 0.187** 0.066 2.843Age /H11002
0.004 0.005 /H110020.874 0.002 0.005 0.461
RCP/H11003Age 0.019* 0.008 2.360 /H110020.001 0.008 /H110020.065
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP /H110020.009 0.094 /H110020.099 0.190* 0.094 2.009
(continued )
353Workplace
conflictand
age

Table III.
PredictorsConflictpartner /H11005Supervisor Conflictpartner /H11005Peer
BS E t BS E t
Conditional direct effect of RCP on Avoiding at values of age
/H110021SD 0.005 0.122 0.041 0.010 0.123 0.081
Mean 0.192* 0.093 2.061 0.005 0.095 0.051/H110011SD 0.380** 0.123 3.078 /H110020.000 0.125 /H110020.003
ConditionalindirecteffectofRCP
onAvoiding(throughgoalinterdependence)atvaluesofage Effect BootSE BootLL95%CI BootUL95%CI Effect BootSE BootLL95%CI BootUL95%CI
Independent goal
/H110021SD 0.062 0.035 0.010 0.152 0.040 0.029 0.001 0.124
Mean 0.058 0.031 0.011 0.138 0.064 0.035 0.006 0.149/H110011SD 0.054 0.034 0.008 0.153 0.088 0.048 0.006 0.200
Cooperative goal
/H110021SD /H110020.025 0.022 /H110020.090 0.003 /H110020.035 0.028 /H110020.107 0.008
Mean /H110020.028 0.023 /H110020.084 0.006 /H110020.037 0.028 /H110020.097 0.013
/H110011SD /H110020.031 0.027 /H110020.104 0.005 /H110020.040 0.030 /H110020.110 0.013
Competitive goal
/H110021SD /H110020.032 0.027 /H110020.111 0.003 /H110020.014 0.028 /H110020.084 0.036
Mean /H110020.015 0.017 /H110020.062 0.010 /H110020.001 0.019 /H110020.040 0.038
/H110011SD 0.002 0.020 /H110020.036 0.048 0.013 0.024 /H110020.028 0.071
Notes:Bootstrap sample size /H110055,000; LL /H11005lower limit; UL /H11005upper limit; CI /H11005confidence interval; * p/H110210.05; **p/H110210.01; *** p/H110210.001; and
†p/H110210.07IJCMA
26,3
354

Table IV.
Resultsofmoderated
mediationanalysis
ondominatingPredictorsConflictpartner /H11005Supervisor Conflictpartner /H11005Peer
B SE tB SE t
DV: Independent goal
Constant /H110020.293*** 0.078 /H110023.774 /H110020.283*** 0.077 /H110023.662
Roleofconflictpartner(RCP) 0.428*** 0.116 3.705 0.502*** 0.114 4.400Age /H110020.012* 0.006 /H110022.027 /H110020.019** 0.006 /H110023.269
RCP/H11003Age /H110020.003 0.010 /H110020.314 0.019† 0.010 1.847
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP 0.506*** 0.115 4.403 0.413*** 0.115 3.586
DV: Cooperative goal
Constant 0.214*** 0.062 3.442 0.214*** 0.062 3.445RCP /H110020.288** 0.092 /H110023.116 /H110020.402*** 0.092 /H110024.374
Age 0.015** 0.005 3.244 0.015** 0.005 3.188RCP/H11003Age /H110020.003 0.008 /H110020.392 /H110020.003 0.009 /H110020.323
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP /H110020.400*** 0.092 /H110024.348 /H110020.285** 0.093 /H110023.071
DV: Competitive goal
Constant 0.033 0.061 0.547 0.032 0.061 0.527RCP /H110020.086 0.090 /H110020.957 /H110020.003 0.090 /H110020.034
Age /H110020.002 0.005 /H110020.321 /H110020.001 0.005 /H110020.137
RCP/H11003Age 0.010 0.008 1.256 0.007 0.008 0.915
Covariate:OtherdummyofRCP /H110020.009 0.090 /H110020.096 /H110020.096 0.091 /H110021.060
DV: Dominating
Constant 3.302*** 0.070 47.300 3.300*** 0.070 47.329
RCP /H110020.211* 0.104 /H110022.033 0.030 0.104 0.289
Independentgoal 0.225*** 0.061 3.660 0.216*** 0.062 3.513Cooperativegoal 0.361*** 0.072 5.033 0.358*** 0.072 4.989Competitivegoal 0.181* 0.073 2.491 0.186* 0.072 2.569Age /H110020.005 0.005 /H110020.943 /H110020.005 0.005 /H110020.887
RCP/H11003Age 0.008 0.009 0.898 0.007 0.009 0.783
Covariate:otherdummyofRCP 0.023 0.105 0.222 /H110020.217* 0.104 /H110022.085
(continued )
355Workplace
conflictand
age

Table IV.
PredictorsConflictpartner /H11005Supervisor Conflictpartner /H11005Peer
B SE tB SE t
Conditional direct effect of RCP on Dominating at values of age
/H110021SD /H110020.290* 0.135 /H110022.145 /H110020.039 0.136 /H110020.285
Mean /H110020.211* 0.104 /H110022.033 0.030 0.104 0.289
/H110011SD /H110020.132 0.137 /H110020.959 0.099 0.137 0.721
ConditionalindirecteffectofRCPon
Dominating(throughgoalinterdependence)atvaluesofage Effect BootSE BootLL95%CI BootUL95%CI Effect BootSE BootLL95%CI BootUL95%CI
Independent goal
/H110021SD 0.103 0.048 0.032 0.226 0.068 0.043 0.007 0.180
Mean 0.096 0.044 0.031 0.203 0.109 0.045 0.037 0.214/H110011SD 0.089 0.052 0.017 0.224 0.149 0.060 0.051 0.285
Cooperative goal
/H110021SD /H110020.093 0.048 /H110020.206 /H110020.016 /H110020.34 0.058 /H110020.273 /H110020.043
Mean /H110020.104 0.039 /H110020.195 /H110020.040 /H110020.144 0.045 /H110020.248 /H110020.070
/H110011SD /H110020.116 0.052 /H110020.238 /H110020.032 /H110020.153 0.053 /H110020.278 /H110020.070
Competitive goal
/H110021SD /H110020.034 0.028 /H110020.114 0.004 /H110020.014 0.029 /H110020.088 0.033
Mean /H110020.016 0.018 /H110020.064 0.010 /H110020.001 0.019 /H110020.038 0.041
/H110011SD 0.003 0.021 /H110020.037 0.050 0.013 0.025 /H110020.025 0.080
Notes:Bootstrap sample size /H110055,000; LL /H11005lower limit; UL /H11005upper limit; CI /H11005confidence interval; * p/H110210.05; **p/H110210.01; *** p/H110210.001; and
†p/H110210.07IJCMA
26,3
356

agegroups.Theseresultssuggestthattheagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteraction
effect on avoiding was partly mediated by independent goal, whereas such aninteraction effect on dominating were fully mediated by independent and cooperativegoals.
The moderating effect of age on avoiding and interpersonal relations and job
satisfaction
Hayes’s(2012) SPSSmacroofmoderationanalysiswasusedtotestthethirdhypothesis
onthemoderatingeffectofageontherelationshipsbetweenavoidingandinterpersonalrelations and job satisfaction. Gender of participants and integrating strategy wereinputted as covariates because of their significant correlation with age and outcomevariables. Results showed that the moderating effect of age on avoiding andinterpersonalrelationswassignificant( B/H110050.013,SE/H110050.007,p/H110050.05).Inparticular,
the negative effect of avoiding on interpersonal relations was only significant forworkersatthemeanand1SDbelowthemeanofage( B/H11005/H110020.224,SE/H110050.065and B/H11005
0.352,SE/H110050.092, respectively, p/H110210.001) but not those at 1 SD above the mean ( B/H11005
0.096,SE/H110050.092,ns), implying that the negative effect of avoiding was only shown
among younger employees but not among older employees. However, this beneficialeffect was not found on job satisfaction ( B/H11005/H110020.001,SE/H110050.011,ns). Additional
analysesshowedthatagedidnotmoderatetheeffectsofotherthreeconflictstrategiesoninterpersonalrelationsnorjobsatisfaction.
Discussion
The present study integrates two theoretical frameworks, namely, SST (
Carstensen,
2006) and theory of cooperation and competition ( Deutsch, 1990 ;Tjosvold, 1998 ), to
examine the underlying mechanism of the age by role of conflict partner interactioneffect on the use of conflict strategies. Consistent with prior literature on age-relatedchanges in behavioral responses to everyday problems and interpersonal tensions(
Birdittet al., 2005;Blanchard-Fields et al., 2004;Fingerman et al., 2008), the present
studyalsodemonstratestheage-relatedincreaseintheuseofpassivestrategiesandtheage-related reduction in destructive strategies when handling conflict with otheremployees. Specifically, older employees used more avoiding when dealing withsupervisors and less dominating when dealing with subordinates than did youngeremployees. Results of this study also reveal that such age differences in avoiding anddominatingstrategiescanbeexplainedbygoalinterdependenceintheconflictincident.Furthermore, in support of our prediction, the negative effect of avoiding oninterpersonal relations is only shown among younger employees but not among olderemployees.Thesefindingsadvancethecurrentliteraturebyshowingthattheeffectofconflictstrategiesonwork-relatedoutcomesisnotuniversal,largelydependingontheageoftheusers.Specifically,whenolderadultsselectthetypeofconflictstrategiesthatis congruent with their developmental goals, the negative consequences of passivestrategies on psychosocial well-being, which are commonly found in youngerpopulation,wouldbeweakenedoreliminated.
Age and conflict strategies at work
The majority of past studies on workplace conflict were conducted in samples ofyoungerworkersorwithanarrowagerange(
ChenandTjosvold,2007 ;ChowandDing,
2002;Rahimetal.,2001).Thepresentstudyadvancestheliteraturebyexaminingtheuse357Workplace
conflictand
age

ofconflictstrategiesinasampleofChineseworkingadultswithawideragerange(22
and 66 years). By recalling an actual conflict incident at work, age differences inhandling conflict with supervisors, peers or subordinates were assessed. Resultsshowed that older employees used avoiding to a greater extent than did youngeremployees when the conflict partner was supervisor, whereas they employed lessdominating when the conflict target was subordinate. These patterns of conflictstrategies are consistent with past research among Asian samples (
Lee, 1990 ;Nguyen
andYang,2012 ),inwhichAsianemployeesutilizedmoredominatingwhendealingthe
conflict with subordinates and used more indirect and harmony-preserving strategieslike avoiding to resolve the conflict with supervisors. However, the present studyrevealsthattheeffectofroleoftheconflictpartneronconflictstrategieswouldfurtherbe moderated by age of the participants.
Fingerman et al.(2008)also found older and
younger adults displayed different behavioral responses toward social partners ofdifferent ages. Similarly, the current study reveals that younger and older employeesvaryintheiruseofconflictstrategieswhendealingwithemployeesofdifferentstatuses,even after taken into consideration of their working experiences in the organization.Specifically, with age, there is an increased use of passive strategies such as avoidingwith supervisors and a decreased use of active destructive strategies such asdominatingwithsubordinates.Despitethesignificantinteractioneffects,themeanagedifferences in avoiding and dominating strategies are not large. However, Chineseworking adults in general tend to utilize non-confrontational conflict approaches thantheirWesterncounterparts(
TangandKirkbride,1986 )infaceofinterpersonalconflicts.
The significant variations in these two conflict strategies between younger and olderemployees found in the present study indeed suggest that the effect of age on conflictmanagementisquiterobust,eveninasampleofculturalnormsofindirectstrategies.
Younger and older employees displayed a similar pattern of using the constructive
strategies, i.e. integrating, to handle conflict with supervisors, peers or subordinates.Inconsistent with the past studies (
Daviset al., 2009), this study did not find an
age-relatedincreaseintheuseofobligingatwork.Suchdiscrepancymaybeduetotheuse of observer ratings in Davis et al.’s study to assess employees’ responses to
workplaceconflict.Futurestudiesshouldexaminetheagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteraction effect by using both subjective and objective measures of behavioralresponsestoworkplaceconflict.
The role of goal interdependence in workplace conflict
Accordingtothetheoryofcooperationandcompetition(
Deutsch,1990 ;Tjosvold,1998 ),
the selection of conflict strategies is determined by one’s goal orientation in a conflictsituation. Cooperative goals are associated with greater use of constructive strategies,whereascompetitiveandindependentgoalsarecorrelatedwithdestructiveandpassivestrategies,respectively(
Alperetal.,1998;Tjosvold,1998 ).Thepresentstudytestedthe
mediating role of the three types of goal interdependence, including cooperative,competitiveandindependentgoals,inavoidinganddominatingstrategiesbetweenagegroups and role of the conflict partner. With reference to the proposition of SST(
Carstensen,2006 ),weexpectedthatolderemployees,whofocusonemotionalgoalsand
interpersonalcloseness,holdamorecooperativebutlesscompetitiveandindependentgoalinthefaceofaconflictwithotheremployeesthandoyoungeremployees.Resultssupportourprediction;inparticular,olderemployeesheldamorecooperativebutlessIJCMA
26,3
358

independent goal than younger employees in an interpersonal conflict at work. These
agedifferencesingoalinterdependencewereshowntoexplainfortheagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteractioneffectonavoidinganddominating.Specifically,theagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteractioneffectondominatingwasmediatedbycooperativeandindependentgoals,whereastheagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteractioneffecton avoiding was partially explained by independent goals. These findings are inalignmentofthepredictionofSSTthatemphasisofemotionalgoalsandinterpersonalcloseness motivates older employees to be more cooperative and interdependent withtheir conflict partners, which, in turn, influences their selection of avoiding anddominatingstrategiestohandletheconflictatwork.
Effect of avoiding among older employees
Past studies have consistently shown that avoidance is an ineffective conflictmanagementstrategyandisoftenassociatedwithnegativeconsequencessuchaspoorrelationship quality, lower job satisfaction, psychological strain or escalatory conflictoutcomes(e.g.
Birdittetal.,2009;DeChurch etal.,2007;Dijkstraetal.,2009).However,
the use of passive strategies by older adults is indeed congruent with theirdevelopmental goals that focus on emotional closeness. It was expected that thenegative consequences of avoiding were only prevalent among younger employeesbecausetheyfocusedonknowledgeacquisitionanddevelopmentofsocialrelationships,whilethenegativeeffectmaynotbefoundamongolderemployees.Thecurrentstudythereforetestedthispredictiontoinvestigatewhetherthenegativeeffectofavoidingoninterpersonal relations and job satisfaction would be moderated by age. Resultspartially support our prediction. In particular, the negative effect of avoiding oninterpersonalrelationswasonlyshownamongyoungeremployeesbutnotamongolderemployees, suggesting that the use of avoiding by older adults does not harm theirinterpersonalrelations.Insupportofthefindingsofpaststudies(
YeungandFung,2012 ;
Yeunget al., 2015), this study provides further evidence to the prediction of SST that
positivepsychosocialoutcomeswouldbeobservedwhenanindividual’sbehaviorsarecongruent with their developmental goals. This finding also offers insights to thegeneral assumption of an age-invariant effect of conflict strategies on work-relatedoutcomes. Future research should therefore take age into account when examiningresponsestoworkplaceconflict.
Yet,themoderatingeffectofagewasnotfoundintherelationshipbetweenavoiding
andjobsatisfaction.Thissuggeststhatgreateruseofavoidingstrategiesisassociatedwithlowerjobsatisfactionforbothyoungerandolderemployees;however,theydonotexertanynegativeimpactoninterpersonalrelationsofolderemployees.Giventhatpastresearch have consistently found that job satisfaction strongly correlates withwork-related outcomes and psychological well-being (
Fisher, 2003 ;Judgeet al., 2001),
future studies should examine the long-term association between job satisfaction andinterpersonalrelationstobetterunderstandwell-beingofolderemployeesatwork.
Limitations and future directions
Wheninterpretingresultsreportedabove,afewlimitationsshouldbeconsidered.First,thisprojectwasconductedamongmanagerialandexecutiveemployees,whoseconflictmanagement might be different from that of junior-level employees. Past studies havedemonstrated that one’s selection of conflict strategies might be affected by the359Workplace
conflictand
age

perceivedpoweroftheconflictpartner( DroryandRitov,1997 );thus,theresultpattern
found in this study might not generalize to junior-grade workers such as clerical orblue-collarworkers.Second,thisstudyreliedonself-reportedratingstoassessconflictstrategies,withoutratingsfromtheconflictpartnerorotheremployees.Futurestudiesshould adopt both subjective and objective assessments of conflict responses tominimize the potential errors in recalling the conflict incident and the use of conflictstrategies. Third, age of the conflict partner was not recorded in the present study.
Fingerman etal.(2008)haveshownthattheuseofconflictstrategiesvariedwiththeage
ofsocialpartners,suggestingthepossibilityofintergenerationaldifferencesinconflictmanagement. Future studies should investigate the phenomenon in bothintergenerationalandintragenerationaldyadstofullyunderstandconflictmanagementacrossadulthood.Fourth,inadditiontotheeffectsofageandroleoftheconflictpartner,other forces at work would also influence one’s selection of conflict strategies, such asthe organizational culture to manage conflict (
Leung and Chan, 1999 ), intergroup
dynamics( TajfelandTurner,1986 )andperceivedfutureinteractionopportunitieswith
theconflictpartner( Fingerman etal.,2008).Futurestudiesshouldincludethesefactors
tohaveamorecomprehensiveassessmentoftheeffectofageonconflictmanagement.Fifth,inviewofthemandatoryretirementageinHongKong(thatis60and65yearsforpublicandprivatesectors,respectively),itisanopenquestionwhetherpre-retirees’goalorientation is different from that of employees aged between 40 and 59 years. Furtherstudies should compare conflict styles and goal orientations as well as their effectsamongemployeesindifferentlifestages.
To conclude, this project advances our understanding of conflict management in a
sample of employees of a wider age range. Even though Chinese adults, regardless ofage, show a greater preference for non-confrontational conflict strategies, the currentstudy demonstrates that older employees utilize more avoiding with supervisors andlessdominatingwithsubordinatesthantheiryoungercounterparts.Theagebyroleoftheconflictpartnerinteractioneffectonavoidinganddominatingcouldbeaccountedforby independent and cooperative goals. In addition, the negative effect of avoiding oninterpersonalrelationswasonlyshowninyoungeremployeesbutnotolderemployees,suggestingthattheuseofthisstrategyisnotalwaysharmful,largelydependingonageoftheusers.
References
Alper,S.,Tjosvold,D.andLaw,K.S.(1998),“Interdependenceandcontroversyingroupdecision
making: antecedents to effective self-managing teams”, Organizational Behavior and
HumanDecisionProcesses ,Vol.74No.1,pp.33-52.
Aranda,M.P.andLincoln,K.D.(2011),“Financialstrain,negativeinteraction,copingstyles,and
mental health among low-income Latinos”, Race and Social Problems , Vol. 3 No. 4,
pp.280-297.
Aryee,S.,Luk,V.,Leung,A.andLo,S.(1999),“Rolestressors,interroleconflict,andwell-being:the
moderatinginfluencesofspousalsupportandcopingbehaviorsamongemployedparentsinHongKong”, JournalofVocationalBehavior ,Vol.54No.2,pp.259-278.
Bazerman,M.H.,Curhan,J.R.,Moore,D.A.andValley,K.L.(2000),“Negotiation”, AnnualReview
ofPsychology ,Vol.51No.1,pp.279-314.
Birditt, K.S. and Fingerman, K.L. (2005), “Do we get better at picking our battles? Age group
differencesindescriptionsofbehavioralreactionstointerpersonaltensions”, TheJournalsIJCMA
26,3
360

of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , Vol. 60 No. 3,
pp.P121-P128.
Birditt, K.S., Fingerman, K.L. and Almeida, D.M. (2005), “Age differences in exposure and
reactions to interpersonal tensions: a daily diary study”, Psychology and Aging , Vol. 20
No.2,pp.330-340.
Birditt, K.S., Rott, L.M. and Fingerman, K.L. (2009), “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say
anythingatall:copingwithinterpersonaltensionsintheparent-childrelationshipduringadulthood”, JournalofFamilyRelationship ,Vol.23No.6,pp.769-778.
Blake,R.andMouton,J.S.(1964), TheManagerialGrid ,GulfPub,Houston.
Blanchard-Fields, F., Stein, R. and Watson, T.L. (2004), “Age differences in emotion-regulation
strategies in handling everyday problems”, Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences
andSocialSciences ,Vol.59No.6,pp.P261-P269.
Brief, A.P. (1998), “Job satisfaction reconsidered”, Attitudes in and Around Organizations , Sage
Publications,ThousandOaks,CA,pp.9-47.
Carstensen,L.L.(2006),“Theinfluenceofasenseoftimeonhumandevelopment”, Science,Vol.312
No.5782,pp.1913-1915.
Chan,D.K.S.andGoto,S.G.(2003),“Conflictresolutionintheculturallydiverseworkplace:some
data from Hong Kong Employees”, Applied Psychology: An International Review , Vol. 52
No.3,pp.441-460.
Chan,K.W.,Huang,X.andNg,P.M.(2008),“Managers’conflictmanagementstylesandemployee
attitudinal outcomes: the mediating role of trust”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management ,
Vol.25No.2,pp.277-295.
Charles,S.T.,Piazza,J.R.,Luong,G.andAlmeida,D.M.(2009),“Nowyouseeit,nowyoudon’t:age
differences in affective reactivity to social tensions”, Psychology and Aging , Vol. 24 No. 3,
pp.645-653.
Chen,Y.F.andTjosvold,D.(2007),“Co-operativeconflictmanagement:anapproachtostrengthen
relationships between foreign managers and Chinese employees”, Asia Pacific Journal of
HumanResources ,Vol.45No.3,pp.271-294.
Cheng, S.T. and Chan, A.C.M. (2005), “Measuring psychological well-being in the Chinese”,
PersonalityandIndividualDifferences ,Vol.38No.6,pp.1307-1316.
Chow, I.H. and Ding, D. (2002), “Moral judgment and conflict handling styles among Chinese in
HongKongandPRC”, TheJournalofManagementDevelopment ,Vol.21No.9,pp.666-679.
Davis,M.H.,Kraus,L.A.andCapobianco,S.(2009),“Agedifferencesinresponsestoconflictinthe
workplace”, The International Journal of Aging and Human Development , Vol. 68 No. 4,
pp.339-355.
DeDreu,C.K.W.andWeingart,L.R.(2003),“Taskversusrelationshipconflict,teamperformance,
and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 88
No.4,pp.741-749.
DeDreu,C.K.W.andGelfand,M.J.(2008), ThePsychologyofConflictandConflictManagementin
Organizations ,LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,NewYork,NY.
De Dreu, C.K.W., van Dierendonck, D. and Dijkstra, M.T.M. (2004), “Conflict at work and
individual well-being”, International Journal of Conflict Management , Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp.6-26.
DeChurch,L.A.,Hamilton,K.L.andHaas,C.(2007),“Effectsofconflictmanagementstrategieson
perceptions of intragroup conflict”, Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice ,
Vol.11No.1,pp.66-78.361Workplace
conflictand
age

Deutsch,M.(1990),“Sixtyyearsofconflict”, InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.1
No.3,pp.237-263.
Deutsch,M.(1994),“Constructiveconflictresolution:principles,trainingandresearch”, Journalof
SocialIssues ,Vol.50No.1,pp.13-32.
Dijkstra,M.T.M.,DeDreu,C.K.W.,Evers,A.andvanDierendonck,D.(2009),“Passiveresponses
tointerpersonalconflictatworkamplifyemployeestrain”, EuropeanJournalofWorkand
OrganizationalPsychology ,Vol.18No.4,pp.405-423.
Drory, A. and Ritov, I. (1997), “Effects of work experience and opponent’s power on conflict
managementstyles”, InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.8No.2,pp.148-161.
Fingerman, K.L., Miller, L. and Charles, S. (2008), “Saving the best for the last: how adults treat
socialpartnersofdifferentages”, PsychologyandAging ,Vol.23No.2,pp.399-409.
Fisher, C.D. (2000), “Mood and emotions while working: missing pieces of job satisfaction?”,
JournalofOrganizationalBehavior ,Vol.21No.2,pp.185-202.
Fisher,C.D.(2003),“Whydolaypeoplebelievethatsatisfactionandperformancearecorrelated?
Possible sources of a commonsense theory”, Journal of Organizational Behavior , Vol. 24
No.6,pp.753-777.
Friedman, R., Chi, S.C. and Liu, L.A. (2006), “An expectancy model of Chinese–American
differences in conflict-avoiding”, Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 37 No. 1,
pp.76-91.
Friedman,R.A.,Tidd,S.T.,Currall,S.C.andTsai,J.C.(2000),“Whatgoesaroundcomesaround:
the impact of personal conflict style on work conflict and stress”, International Journal of
ConflictManagement ,Vol.11No.1,pp.32-55.
Fung, H.H. and Carstensen, L.L. (2004), “Motivational changes in response to blocked goals and
foreshortened time: testing alternatives to socioemotional selectivity theory”, Psychology
andAging ,Vol.19No.1,pp.68-78.
Gross,J.J.(1998),“Antecedent-andresponse-focusedemotionregulation:divergentconsequences
for experience, expression, and physiology”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ,
Vol.74No.1,pp.224-237.
Gross, J.J. and John, O.P. (2003), “Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes:
implications for affect, relationships, and wellbeing”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology ,Vol.85No.2,pp.348-362.
Gross, M.A. and Guerrero, L.K. (2000), “Managing conflict appropriately and effectively: an
application of the competence model to Rahim’s organizational conflict styles”,InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.11No.3,pp.200-226.
Hayes, A.F. (2012), “Process: a versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation,
moderation,andconditionalprocessmodeling[Whitepaper]”,availableat:
www.afhayes.
com/public/process2012.pdf (accessed20January2014).
Hayes,A.F.andPreacher,K.J.(2014),“Statisticalmediationanalysiswithamulticategorical
independent variable”, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology ,
Vol. 67, pp. 451-470.
Hedge, J.W., Borman, W.C. and Lammlein, S.E. (2006), The Aging Workforce: Realities, Myths, and
ImplicationsforOrganizations ,AmericanPsychologicalAssociation,Washington,DC.
Janssen, O. and van de Vliert, E. (1996), “Concern for the other’s goals: key to (de-) escalation of
conflict”, InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.7No.2,pp.99-120.
Jehn, K. (1995), “A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup
conflict”, AdministrativeScienceQuarterly ,Vol.40No.2,pp.256-282.IJCMA
26,3
362

Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K. (2001), “The job satisfaction-job
performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review”, Psychological Bulletin ,
Vol.127No.3,pp.376-407.
Kunin, T. (1955), “The construction of a new type of attitude measure”, Personnel Psychology ,
Vol.8No.1,pp.65-77.
Lee, C.W. (1990), “Relative status of employees and styles of handling interpersonal conflict: an
experimentalstudywithKoreanmanagers”, InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,
Vol.1No.4,pp.327-340.
Leung,K.andChan,D.K.S.(1999),“Conflictmanagementacrossculture”,inAdamopoulos,J.and
Kashima, Y. (Eds), Social Psychology and Cultural Context: Essays in Honor of Harry C.
Triandis,Sage,CA,pp.177-188.
Ma, Z. (2007), “Conflict management styles as indicators of behavioral pattern in business
negotiation”, InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.18No.3,pp.260-279.
Martin,G.E.andBergmann,T.J.(1996),“Thedynamicsofbehaviouralresponsetoconflictinthe
workplace”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , Vol. 69 No. 4,
pp.377-387.
Ng, T.W.H. and Feldman, D.C. (2008), “The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job
performance”, JournalofAppliedPsychology ,Vol.93No.2,pp.392-423.
Nguyen, H.H.D. and Yang, J. (2012), “Chinese employees’ interpersonal conflict management
strategies”, InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.23No.4,pp.382-412.
Oetzel, J.G. (1998), “The effects of self-construals and ethnicity on self-reported conflict styles”,
CommunicationReports ,Vol.11No.2,pp.133-144.
Pearson,A.W.,Ensley,M.D.andAmason,A.C.(2002),“AnassessmentandrefinementofJehn’s
intragroup conflict scale”, International Journal of Conflict Management , Vol. 12 No. 3,
pp.110-126.
Poitras, J. (2010), “Meta-analysis of the impact of the research setting on conflict studies”,
InternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.23No.2,pp.116-132.
Posthuma, R.A. and Campion, M.A. (2009), “Age stereotypes in the workplace: common
stereotypes,moderators,andfutureresearchdirections?”, JournalofManagement ,Vol.35
No.1,pp.158-188.
Preacher, K.J., Rucker, D.D. and Hayes, A.F. (2007), “Addressing moderated mediation
hypotheses:theory,methods,andprescriptions”, MultivariateBehavioralResearch ,Vol.42
No.1,pp.185-227.
Rahim, M.A. (1983), “A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict”, Academy of
ManagementJournal ,Vol.26No.2,pp.368-376.
Rahim, M.A. (1986), “Referent role and styles of handling interpersonal conflict”, The Journal of
SocialPsychology ,Vol.126No.1,pp.79-86.
Rahim, M.A. (2011), Managing Conflict in Organizations , 4th ed., Transaction Publishers, New
Brunswick,NJ.
Rahim,M.A.,Antonioni,D.andPsenicka,C.(2001),“Astructuralequationsmodelofleaderpower,
subordinates’ styles of handling conflict, and job performance”, International Journal of
ConflictManagement ,Vol.12No.3,pp.191-211.
Römer, M., Rispens, S., Giebels, E. and Euwema, M.C. (2012), “A helping hand? The moderating
role of leaders’ conflict management behavior on the conflict-stress relationship ofemployees: how leaders’ management behavior affects employee conflicts”, Negotiation
Journal,Vol.28No.3,pp.253-277.363Workplace
conflictand
age

Rubin,J.Z.,Pruitt,D.G.andKim,S.H.(1994), SocialConflict:Escalation,Stalemate,andSettlement ,
2nded.,McGraw-Hill,NewYork,NY.
Ryff,C.D.(1989),“Happinessiseverything,orisit?Explorationsonthemeaningofpsychological
well-being”, JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology ,Vol.57No.6,pp.1069-1081.
Shih, H.A. and Susanto, E. (2010), “Conflict management styles, emotional intelligence, and job
performance in public organizations”, International Journal of Conflict Management ,
Vol.21No.2,pp.147-168.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1986), “The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour”, in
Worchel, S. and Austin, W.G. (Eds), Psychology of Intergroup Relations , Nelson-Hall,
Chicago,IL,pp.7-24.
Tang,S.F.Y.andKirkbride,P.S.(1986),“DevelopingconflictmanagementskillsinHongKong:an
analysis of some cross-cultural implications”, Management Education and Development ,
Vol.17No.3,pp.287-301.
Thomas,K.W.(1990),“Conflictandnegotiationprocessesinorganizations”,inDunnett,M.D.and
Hough, L.M. (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology , 2nd ed.,
ConsultingPsychologistPress,CA,pp.651-717.
Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., Yang, Z., Kim, H.S., Lin, S.L. and Nishida, T. (1991),
“Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflict: a study in fivecultures”, TheInternationalJournalofConflictManagement ,Vol.2No.1,pp.275-296.
Tjosvold,D.(1998),“Cooperativeandcompetitivegoalapproachtoconflict:accomplishmentsand
challenges”, AppliedPsychology ,Vol.47No.3,pp.285-313.
Tjosvold, D., Andrews, I.R. and Jones, H. (1983), “Cooperative and competitive relationships
betweenleadersandsubordinates”, HumanRelations ,Vol.36No.12,pp.1111-1124.
Tjosvold, D. and Chia, L.C. (1989), “Conflict between managers and workers: the role of
cooperationandcompetition”, TheJournalofSocialPsychology ,Vol.129No.2,pp.235-247.
Yeung, D.Y. and Fung, H.H. (2009), “Aging and work: how do SOC strategies contribute to job
performanceacrossadulthood?”, PsychologyandAging ,Vol.24No.4,pp.927-940.
Yeung, D.Y. and Fung, H.H. (2012), “Impacts of suppression on emotional responses and
performanceoutcomes:anexperience-samplingstudyinyoungerandolderworkers”, The
Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , Vol. 67 No. 6.
Yeung,D.Y.,Fung,H.H.andChan,D.K.-S.(2015),“Positiveeffectofsocialwork-relatedvalueson
work outcomes: the moderating role of age and work situation”, The Journals of
Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , Vol. 70, pp. 235-246.
Yeung, D.Y., Fung, H.H. and Kam, C. (2012), “Age differences in problem solving strategies: the
mediating role of future time perspective”, Personality and Individual Differences , Vol. 53
No.1,pp.38-43.
Yuan,W.(2010),“ConflictmanagementamongAmericanandChineseemployeesinmultinational
organizations in China”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal , Vol. 17,
pp.299-311.
Corresponding author
DanniiY.Yeungcanbecontactedat:
dannii.yeung@cityu.edu.hk
Forinstructionsonhowtoorderreprintsofthisarticle,pleasevisitourwebsite:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Orcontactusforfurtherdetails: permissions@emeraldinsight.comIJCMA
26,3
364

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.