Personality traits are one of the most
important determinants of conflict management resolution skills. Big Five
Personality Dimension also known as Five Factor Model is one of the most widely
studied and discussed models by researchers. Big Five personality traits
consists of five traits conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion,
openness to experience, and emotional stability (Robbins et al. 2008). Moberg
(2001) found that big five factor model of personality has direct impact on the
preferences of conflict management resolution skills.
Conflicts are one of the important parts of
organizational life. The main parties of conflict are always human part of
organization. Conflict cannot be avoided and most of us see it as a destructive
process (Lindelow & Scott, 1989 cited in Mukhtar & Habib, 2010). How we
perceive conflict, positive or negative, depends on how conflicts are handled
(Rahim, 1986). Thomas (1976) developed a two-dimensional framework of conflict
handling modes, which distinguished five conflict handling modes collaborating,
accommodating, competing, avoiding, and compromising mode.
There was no study conducted yet in
determining the relationship between personality traits and
conflict management resolution skills of Managers of Cooperative in Digos City.
Thus, this study will intend to contribute to the body of knowledge.
The purpose of this study is to look
into the relationship of personality traits and conflict management resolution
skills of managers of cooperative in Digos City.
this study seeks to answer the following objectives:
1. Assess the level
of personality traits in terms of:
1.4 Openness to experience;
1.5 emotional stability;
2. Assess the level of conflict management
resolution skills in terms of the following:
2.4 Accommodating; and
3. Determine the significant relationship
personality traits and conflict management resolution skills of Managers of
Cooperative in Digos City.
4. Determine if personality
traits significantly influence the conflict management resolution skills of
Managers of Cooperative in Digos City.
section presents various literatures and studies from different authors which
have essential bearing in this study. The readers will get to understand the
variables in this study through the readings presented.
Big five personality
traits consists of five traits Extroversion, Agreeableness, Openness to
experience, Emotional stability, and Conscientiousness (Robbins et al.
2008).Extroversion is “a personality dimension describing someone who is
sociable, gregarious, and assertive”. Agreeableness is “a personality dimension
that describes someone who is good-natured, cooperativeand trusting”.
Conscientiousness is “a personality dimension that describes someone who is
responsible, dependable, persistent, and organized”. Emotional stability is “a
personality dimension that characterizes someone as calm, self-confident,
secure (positive) versus nervous, depressed, and insecure (negative). Openness
to experience is “a personality dimension that characterizes someone in terms
of imagination, sensitivity, and curiosity”. Robbins. et al (2008).
In addition, some
early studies supported a relationship between conflict styles and personality
dimensions measured as Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) (Kilmann &
Thomas, 1975), but others have reported weak relationships between personality
and styles of handling conflict (Jones & Melcher, 1982) or personality and
negotiation outcomes (Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993; Wall & Blum,1991). This
inconsistency has led some researchers to question whether individual
personality traits are important in predicting conflict handling styles and
negotiation behaviors (Lewicki, Litterer, Minton, & Saunders, 1994).
majority of the past research focused on isolated, readily available and single
personality trait rather than on a comprehensive model of personality structure
(Antonioni, 1998; Ma & Jaeger, 2003).
With the emergence of a widely accepted comprehensive personality
measure—the Big Five (Costa & McCrae, 1995), recently studies have linked Big
Five personality factors to conflict styles and more promising results have
been obtained (Antonioni, 1998; Moberg, 1998; Moberg, 2001).
On the other hand, Digman
(1990) provides a thorough review of the history and development of the Big
Five, which takes its name from Norman (1963). The initiative to develop this
taxonomy formally began after McDougall wrote in 1932, “Personality may with
advantage be broadly analyzed into five distinguishable but inseparable
factors” (p. 15). Since that time, an impressive body of knowledge has developed,
providing evidence for a five-factor model of personality. This model has been
shown to be highly robust, existing across different theoretical frameworks,
cultures, and samples and using different instruments and sources of ratings
(Barrick & Mount, 1991). More recent, efforts have been undertaken to
classify the Big Five into an even higher order set of domains (Digman, 1997).
Business researchers’ interest in the Big Five became accelerated following Barrick and Mount’s
1991 meta-analysis of the relationship
between the Big Five and job performance.
Management Resolution Skills
is based on the principle that it is impossible (and not always desirable) to
eliminate conflict and not all conflicts can be resolved, but learning how to
manage work conflicts is beneficial for employees and the organization (Dreu
and Weingart, 2003; Teague and Roche, 2012).
managers considered that suppressing conflict and keeping peace at all costs
was the best way to manage conflict. However, the recent view is that conflicts
may be a warning sign for a more serious problem that needs to be resolved
(Darling and Walker, 2001).
On the other hand, resolving
conflict is one of the fundamental management tasks. The strategy one tends to employ
to approach conflict situations represents one’s characteristic mode of
conflict handling or conflict style (Black & Mouton, 1964; Moberg, 1998).
studies indicate that line managers handle workplace conflicts in many
organisations, there is little theoretical and empirical research on how they
actually perform such unpopular HR roles (Hunter and Renwick, 2009; Björkman et
Moreover, there are
disagreements about the key factorsinfluencing line managers’ conflict management
modes; psychologists emphasise the role of the conflict situation (Rahim, 2002,
Thomas et al., 2008) and personal traits (Antonioni, 1998), while other
scholars focus solely on the impact of the organisational aspects of managing
interpersonal conflict (Teague and Roche, 2012). The contribution of this paper
lies in investigating whether situational, personal and/or organisational
aspects influence line managers’ conflict management modes.
Collaborating mode involves
cooperation between the parties to reach a win–win solution that satisfies both
parties. It is very similar to the integrative and problem-solving types, as
all seek to find a long-term solution considering the interests of both parties
(Holt and DeVore, 2005).
ignores one’s own needs and is associated with attempting to play down the
differences and emphasising similarities (Rahim, Magner and Shapiro, 2000).
This can be efficient in solving interpersonal relationship conflicts due to
its long-term orientation (i.e. to develop trust), but not task conflicts
(Chung-Yan and Moeller, 2010).
Competing mode has
been identified with a win–lose orientation. Competing may mean standing up for
one’s rights and/or defending a position that the person believes to be correct
(Rahim, Magner and Shapiro, 2000).
Avoiding mode is used
to prevent conflict, to ignore the situation and postpone the conflict
situation (Rahim, 2002).It is often used out of fear of confrontation due to
lack of confidence in conflict management skills (Rahim, 2002). Canary (2003) found that avoidance is
generally ineffective at resolving disagreements.
Compromising mode is
associated with give-and-take and attempts to satisfy each party’s concern
(Thomas et al., 2008). Rahim (2002)
found that compromising is the most successful mode at resolving interpersonal