Edited and reviewed by: Darren C. Treadway, Niagara University, United States
This article was submitted to Organizational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Conflict management research recognizes that conflicts are inherently part of organizations and organizational dynamics. Different interests, different resources, and power relations drive both competition and conflict, while positive interdependences drive parties to cooperate. This is true for interpersonal relations at work, as well as for teams, departments, and at (inter)organizational level. Conflicts are not necessarily destructive, and often inevitable part of innovation and change, and constructive ways of conflict management are at the essence of modern and ethical organizational practices. Such recognizes the well-established scientific evidence that cooperation is at the heart of sustainable organizational success. Cooperative relations feed a joint problem-solving approach toward conflicts at all levels and is stimulated in organizational settings. One important antecedent as well as consequence of cooperation in organizations is mutual trust. The aim of this Research Topic is to promote research on constructive conflict management and trust in organizational life at all levels.
The five empirical articles included in this Research Topic analyze the role of trust in organizational conflict in different contexts, such as collective negotiation, labor mediation, family firms, and religious organizations. They tackle different factors that can impact this relationship, such as emotions, trustworthiness, leadership, and conflict resolution methods. Diverse methodologies are used in this collection of papers—quantitative, qualitative and longitudinal—which contributes to the quality of understanding the link between trust and conflict management in organizations. In addition, these papers show results from data collected in different cultures, including Europe and Africa.
In the first paper by
The second paper by
The third paper, by
The fourth paper, by
The fifth and last paper, by
Together, these five empirical studies all demonstrate in different ways the key role trust and trustworthiness plays in constructive conflict handling. Despite highly different contexts, relations, conflicts and cultures, and through diverse research methodologies, trust and trustworthiness contribute to long term relations, constructive conflict, wellbeing and also influence of parties. This indeed an upward spiral, where parties, being trustworthy, and handling conflict constructively, feed mutual trust, wellbeing and achieve better organizational outcomes. This process also holds, when conflictive issues grow, and stakes are high. Organizations and societies face immense challenges to cope with unprecedented environmental changes. The conflict potential rises on all levels. The outcomes of these different studies all point the only reasonable way forward: a shared vision in which all parties recognize the underlying positive interdependence, despite conflicts of interests, therefore see the need to cooperate. Trustworthiness as (global) partners, through demonstrated competence, integrity, benevolence and consistency, is needed more than ever. The academic challenge is, to demonstrate this “crude law of cooperation” also under severe conditions, and further test methods for constructive conflict management under high complex and dynamic circumstances.
All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.