Boomers Like to Confront, Generation Y Is Okay with Withdrawal, But They All Love to Negotiate in India

• Published date: 01 June 2016
• Date: 01 June 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21163

C R Q, vol. 33, no. 4, Summer 2016 403

© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the Association for Confl ict Resolution

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21163

Boomers Like to Confront, Generation Y Is Okay with

Withdrawal, But They All Love to Negotiate in India

Priya Gupta

Sonali Bhattacharya

Netra Neelam

Monika Kunte

 is article compares the confl ict resolution styles of the three genera-

tions in the Indian workforce today—baby boomers, generation X, and

generation Y—based on a research sample size of 503 respondents.  e

questionnaire developed by Pareek and Purohit ( 2010 ) classifi es confl ict

resolution styles into fi ve categories: three approach-based styles (confron-

tation, compromise, and negotiation) and two avoidance-based styles

(withdrawal and resignation).  e study found that Indian workers

by and large prefer approach-based styles, with negotiation being the

most preferred style across generations and gender. Baby boomers were

found to have a signifi cantly higher preference for confrontation than

those in generation Y. Generation Y is signifi cantly more likely than

baby boomers to choose withdrawal as their confl ict resolution style. In

addition, male baby boomers are more likely than female boomers to

use resignation as a confl ict resolution style.  e article discusses possible

reasons for these fi ndings in the Indian cultural context and suggests

future research.

A number of multinational companies have ventured into the Indian

diaspora in the past couple of decades. As people across industries have

started working in cross-national, cross-linguistic, and cross-cultural teams,

it has become important for expatriate managers to develop cross-cultural

understanding, or cultural intelligence, in order to arrive at eff ective solu-

tions for confl ict in the workplace ( omas and Inkson 2009 ), especially

in India, a multireligious, multilinguistic, multicultural, multicaste nation.

404 GUPTA, BHATTACHARYA, NEELAM, KUNTE

C R Q • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21163

 e Maruti Suzuki massacre at Manesar in 2012 arose from a cross-

cultural confl ict of work ethos (Krishnarao and Ukey 2013 ) that stemmed

from the low sensitivity of the Japanese management to the laborers.  e

trade union, led by young workers, was incensed by their low pay, poor

working conditions, and the abusive behavior of the supervisors.  e Indian

supervisors, operating from a culture of high power distance common in

that region, were generally abusive as well. In fact, the incident was sparked

by a derogatory caste-based remark made by a high-caste supervisor to a

low-caste laborer who physically attacked the supervisor as a result and

was suspended.  is incident stirred up the trade union leaders and led to

a strike, mob attack, destruction of property, and physical injury to some

employees. Management, in fact, had completely ignored the simmering

displeasure among laborers about their wages and working conditions and

the passive confl ict between the laborers and supervisor.  is incident was

due to cross-cultural diff erences in work ethos and management ’ s strategy

to avoid the ongoing confl ict and laborer unrest.

In this article, we look at the issue of confl ict management through the

lenses of Indian ethos and culture, generational diff erences, and gender

perspective.

Con ict

March and Simon ( 1958 ) defi ned confl ict as “breakdown of standard mecha-

nism of decision making.”  omas ( 1992 ) conceptualized the existence of

confl ict as when one party perceives that the other party has negatively aff ected

or can negatively aff ect issues that it cares about, given that both parties have

an interdependent and interactional relationship.  is relationship can be

cross-functional, cross-country, cross-disciplinary, or cross-generational. Con-

fl ict has been defi ned as task-related disagreement that arises when the goals

of a person or a group are perceived to be incompatible with those of another

person or when the goal is expressed with the intention of denying the oth-

ers’ goals (Dyer and Song 1997 ). Xie, Song, and Stringfellow ( 1998 ) defi ned

interfunctional confl ict as diff erences in goals and ideologies between inter-

dependent and interactive functional groups. Cross-functional confl ict may

often turn out to be positive when it stimulates the generation of new ideas

from confl icting parties to arrive at a good new alternative (Baron 1991 ).

It may help in information mobilization if it prompts a functional team to

gather and share information with cross-functional teams with confl icting

ideologies. Confl ict can therefore be viewed as substantive, task-related dis-

Con ict Resolution Styles by Generation in India 405

C R Q • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21163

agreement, or it can be aff ective, charged with emotion and characterized by

anger, frustration, and distrust (Ross 1989 ; Wall and Nolan 1986 ).

 ere are contradictory views on the impact of organizational confl icts

on team performance. Some studies argue that confl ict is destructive and

decreases team performance (Brown 1983 ; Schwenk and Cosier 1993 ).

Other studies have shown that confl ict stimulates high team performance

(Baron 1991 ; Bourgeois 1985 ; Putnam 1994 ).

Con ict Management

Researchers have suggested a number of methods for resolving confl ict

(Blake, Shepard, and Mouton 1964 ; Katz 1964 ; Likert and Likert 1976 ;

McGregor 1967 ; Pareek 1982 ;  omas and Schmidt 1976 ). Normative

theory suggests an interaction-infl uence strategy for resolving confl ict and

emphasizes a participatory form of management. Pareek ( 1982 ) put for-

ward a contingency theory of confl ict resolution, which is based on the

criticality of the situation and the intergroup integration. It suggests either

an active approach for those in confl ict to solve the problem by themselves

or with help of others, or a passive approach of avoidance out of fear or

denial (Blake et al. 1964 ; Pareek 1982 ). According to Blake et al. ( 1964 ),

there are fi ve managerial styles—task manager, country club manager,

impoverished manager, dampened pendulum manager, and team man-

ager—each with diff erent strategies for dealing with confl ict—forcing,

smoothing, withdrawing, compromising, and confrontation or problem

solving, respectively. Likert and Likert ( 1976 ) established that a partici-

patory form of confl ict resolution is the best possible method of confl ict

resolution. Syna Desivilya and Yagil ( 2005 ) found that cooperative pat-

terns of confl ict management are associated with positive emotional states;

contentious or dominating patterns of confl ict management are associated

with both positive and negative emotional states; and an avoidance pattern

of confl ict management is associated with negative emotions only.

It has been observed that individuals or organizations that adapt con-

frontation or problem solving to deal with confl ict achieve high perfor-

mance and develop better interpersonal relationships (Blake et al. 1964 ;

Lawrence and Lorsch 1967a , 1967b ). Burke ( 1970 ), in one of his investiga-

tions, found that confrontation or problem solving was always related posi-

tively to the dependent variables of the constructive use of diff erences and

disagreements, and some aspects of the superior-subordinate relationship.