Managing Intractable Identity Conflicts

Author(s): C. Marlene Fiol, Michael G. Pratt and Edward J. O'Connor

Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Jan., 2009), pp. 32-55
Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27759984
Accessed: 22-02-2016 14:39 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management
Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Academy ofManagement Review

2009.Vol. 34,No. 1,32-55.

MANAGING INTRACTABLE IDENTITY

CONFLICTS
C. MARLENE FIOL
University

of Colorado

Denver

MICHAEL G. PRATT
Boston College

EDWARD J.O'CONNOR
University

of Colorado

Denver

in organizations.
conflicts
intergroup
Identity is often at the heart of ongoing
Drawing
from theories of conflict management,
social
identifica
identity, and organizational
a
the intractable
which delineates
tion, we develop
identity conflict resolution model
multiphase
eventual

process

by which

intergroup

the conflicting

At a

to be (those having control over med

themselves
ical decisions
for their patients).
that
Given

the
by attacking
team's profes

&
1997; Rouhana
(e.g., Northrup, 1989; Rothman,
in
then become
Bar-Tal,
1998). Parties
trapped
an ongoing conflict spiral fromwhich
have
they
themselves
difficulty extricating
(e.g., Coleman,
2003; Diehl & Goertz,
1993; Zartman, 2005).
is illustrative of a widespread
The example

support for the physicians'

and it led to the physicians'
painful attempts to remove

recommendations,
eventual costly and
the CEO. Over time,
out of control in that the
the situation spiraled
into
original dispute multiplied
exponentially
numerous
unrelated battles, such as
seemingly
fights over allocation
nison, 2002).

of funds (O'Connor

problem not only in health care but in numerous

interde
types of organizational
settings with
a
in
pendent groups. Research
variety of areas
on
is converging
the importance of identity dy

in understanding
and persis
ongoing
interactions in organizations
be
tently negative
tween and among
and
groups
professional
administrators
(O'Connor, Fiol, & Guthrie, 2006;
Pratt & Rafaeli,
1997), between artists and busi
ness
and
people
(e.g., musicians
symphony

namics

& An

We
thank Kevin Corley,
Jill Purdy, Cliff Young, Peter Bry
and the faculty at George
ant, Sam Gaertner,
Greg Oldham,
of Management,
of Southern
School
the University
Mason's
California's
well

as

Marshall

former associate

School
editor

of Business,
Randall

reviewers
for their helpful
anonymous
versions
of this manuscript.

to permit

have noted that when

identities are implicated
in a conflict, the conflict tends to escalate,
en
an
number of issues
compassing
ever-widening

identity (those in control of the organiza

tions future) by refusing to buy into and support
the vision they had for the hospital. This behav
ior led the administrators
to withhold
further

sional

shift in order

(Kriesberg, 2003). As in the example above, many

are also
conflicts
characterized
by tensions
from
in
how
differences
fun
groups
stemming
define
themselves
and
from
threats
damentally
to those self-definitions.
Numerous
scholars

to improving
essential
care. This perceived
the quality of patient
be
havior on the part of administration
threatened
the very essence of who the physicians
believed
recommendations

retaliated
threat, the physicians
core
of
the
administrative
very

identities

in organi
Intergroup conflicts are ubiquitous
zations. These conflicts often involve, but are not
limited to, disputes over interests and resources

in the midwestern
community hospital
the
medical
staff
that
United States,
complained
were
team
their CEO and her administrative
ignoring, and even thwarting, patient initiatives

and

parties'

harmony.

and
Peterson

comments

INSEAD,
and

board

labor
members;
2000), between
Glynn,
and management
(Fisher, 1983; Haydu,
1989), be
tween external and internal constituencies
(Dal

as

three

ton, 2003; Lewicki, Gray, & Elliott, 2003), and be

tween and among different demographic
groups

on earlier

32
without thecopyright
Copyright of theAcademy ofManagement, all rightsreserved.Contentsmay not be copied, emailed, posted toa listserv,or otherwise transmitted
holder's express written permission. Users may print,download, or email articles forindividual use only.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol,

Pratt

& Davidson,
&
1999; Tomlinson
(Friedman
Lewicki, 2006).
Unfortunately, as Rothman notes, "When peo
as expressed
and
essential
identities,
ple's
their
maintained
primary group affiliations,
by
are threatened
or frustrated, intransigent
con
con
flict almost
For
follows.
such
inevitably
of conflict manage
methods
flicts, conventional
ment are usually
and may even
inadequate
exacerbate
the problem"
(1997: 5). The difficulty
of managing
such conflicts creates serious chal
for organizations
that serve as arenas
lenges
where
these conflicts play out. Identity conflicts
can alter members'
attributions of behavior and
distort communication
(Friedman & Davidson,
& Bar-Tal,
1999; Northrup,
1989; Rouhana
1998),
which can lead to costly errors, decreased
learn
turnover
and
increased
ing in organizations,
&
When
Brown, 2002).
groups are in
(Humphreys
are
also
less
conflict, organizations
likely to de
rive benefits such as flexibility and creativity,

with diversity and plural

which are associated
in
(Williams & O'Reilly,
1998).
ity
organizations
some of these outcomes are true of many
While
forms of conflict, they are exacerbated
when
are
is
because
such
conflicts
involved
identity

and expansive,
long-lasting
thereby straining
and ultimately
threaten
working
relationships
the
survival.
the
Moreover,
ing
organization's
on
for
conflicts
identities
based
group
potential
is likely to increase as organizations
continue to
more
and
diverse
become
globalize
(e.g., Ohlott,
& Dalton, 2004), as professional
Chrobot-Mason,
and nonprofessional
roles become
increasingly
1995), and as
interdependent
(e.g., Wallace,
econ
unions potentially
in a global
revitalize
omy (e.g., Turner, 2005).
treat
there is a lack of systematic
Although
or
ment of such long-standing
in
the
disputes

&
literature
(Bunker, Alban,
ganizational
con
nature
the
of
Lewicki, 2004),
identity-based
in the literature
flicts has been well documented
on intractable
even
social
conflicts. However,
this literature has yet to converge on a model
for
these
is
There
conflicts.
managing
recognition
of the conflicting parties
that identity beliefs
in order to resolve intractable con
must change
flicts (Kelman,
2006; Northrup,
1989), but we
know very little about
the nature of the neces
and even less about how
sary identity changes
and why they occur.
The main purpose
of this paper is to address
limitations. We draw on theories of con

these

and

O'Connor

33

flictmanagement,
social identity, and organiza
to propose a model
tional identification
formov
from
intractable
conflicts
(IICs) to
ing
identity
in
enduring
intergroup harmony
organizations.
We
take very seriously
the notion forwarded by
that if identity is part of the
prior researchers
it
must
also
be part of the solution
problem,
2006; Northrup,
(Kelman,
1989). The proposed
model
identifies a multiphase
process by which
the conflicting parties' identities shift in order to
harmonious
rela
permit eventual
intergroup
tions. Following
Kilduff (2006: 252), our model
is motivated
in the
development
by problems
not
in
the
literature. The paper
world,
just gaps
contributes
"actionable
which, ac
knowledge,"
to
and in
cording
Argyris, describes,
explains,
forms users not only about
"what is likely to

under the specified conditions but how

happen
to create the conditions and actions
in the first
place"

(1996: 392).

INTRACTABLECONFLICTS AND IDENTITY

Intractable
conflicts are protracted and social
that
resist resolution
conflicts
(Burgess & Bur
1995;
gess, 2006; Northrup, 1989; Pruitt & Olczak,
Putnam & Wondolleck,
labels are
2003). These
to describe
often used
ethnonational
(Crocker,
& Aall, 2004, 2005), societal
(Sen, 2006),
Hampson,
et al.,
and environmental
conflicts
(Lewicki
on
conflicts
has
intractable
2003). Research
tended to take one of two forms: (1) an analysis
or (2) a description
of their characteristics
of
for
them. Identity has
techniques
managing
been integral to the firstperspective;
it is largely
in the second.
absent
Characteristics

of Intractable

Conflicts

view intractability as a dynamic

Researchers
of
property
intergroup relations, with conflicts
more or less intractable
over time
becoming

et al.,
& Burgess,
2006; Crocker
(e.g.. Burgess
et
Lewicki
&
2005;
al., 2003; Putnam
Wondolleck,
on the
consensus
2003). There is considerable
of these conflicts. One
characteristics
central
of intractable conflicts is that they
characteristic
are long-standing
2003; Diehl &
(e.g., Coleman,

& Bar-Tal,
1993; Rouhana
1998; Zartman,
for
For
2005), lasting
years or even generations.
at
the
conflicts
example,
union-management
have
United Airlines
lasted
for over twenty
conflicts are
(Bradsher, 2000). Intractable
years

Goertz,

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

34

Academy

of Management

ox chronically
sa
to be pervasive
also believed
lient to those involved
(Putnam & Wondolleck,
& Bar-Tal,
2003; Rouhana
1998). Such pervasive
ness is illustrated in a recent survey of hospital
in the United States, which showed
CEOs
that
relations
problematic
physician-administrator
were among
their top concerns,
second only to
financial woes
(Evans, 2007). Such conflicts also
infiltrate multiple
spheres of life (e.g., work and
re
nonwork), weaving
together
identity and
issues
source-related
(Rothman, 1997), some of
which are not directly related to the initial con
at
flict. In the example
an
paper,
identity dispute

the beginning
of this
over the legitimacy of
initiatives expanded
to include
patient quality
numerous
unrelated
resource-based
seemingly
battles, ending with attempts by the physicians
to remove the CEO.
to expand
The tendency
the
increases
the com
original dispute
beyond
plexity of these conflicts.
view identity as being im
Many researchers
in
intractable
in
conflicts. Specifically,
plicated
tractable conflicts are characterized
by simplify
ing stereotypes and zero-sum conceptualizations
of identity (Azar, 1986; Coleman,
2003; Kelman,
1999, 2006; Putnam & Wondolleck,
2003; Zartman,
2005). The identities of parties in intractable con
flicts are negatively
such that a
interdependent

key component of each group's identity is based

on negation
of the other group
1999,
(Kelman,
That
for
2006; Putnam & Wondolleck,
is,
2003).
a
A
and
salient
of
A's
B,
part
Groups
Group
of Group B, and
identity is no* being a member
vice versa. Furthermore,
for one group tomain
tain its legitimacy,
it must
the
delegitimize
other.

In the identification
literature, defining who
one is based
on who one is nof is called
"dis
identification"
(Dukerich, Kramer, & Parks, 1998;
who are
Elsbach,
1999; Pratt, 2000). Groups
bound up in IICs are in a state of mutual
dis
of
identification, which is strengthened because
cognitive
simplifications
parties
ig
whereby
nore the potential
plurality of outgroup mem
bers' identities. "The foundations of degradation
include not only descriptive misrepresentation,
but also the illusion of a singular
identity that
others must

attribute to the person demeaned"

(Sen, 2006: 8). To illustrate, Glynn
(2000: 290) ob
served that in a conflict between musicians
and
a symphony
both sides
in
board,
engaged

heated, mutual
cians perceiving

with musi
disidentification,
as
the diverse board members

Review

January

and board members

weasels"
"money-grubbing
as
all
musicians
and
viewing
overly idealistic
to
understand
the
financial
unwilling
picture.
a strong
Disidentification
has
evaluative/
affective component
(Pratt, 2000); in intractable
is expressed
in strong
conflicts, disidentification

fear
hatred,
including
pride, and
& Wondolleck,
2003; Putnam
(Coleman,
2003;
1 provides
evi
Sen, 2006; Wedge,
1987). Table
dence of these characteristics
in two conflictive
relations in
settings: (1) physician-administrator
the hospital
in the opening vignette
described
and
relations at United
(2) labor-management
Airlines.
Of all the characteristics
of IICs noted in Ta
ble 1, identity is not only the most central but
also helps to explain
the presence
of the others.
as a core construct that links the
For example,
emotions,

individual

with

larger collectives
(Cooley, 1922;
1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1979), identity
Northrup,
explains why such conflicts are both salient and
emotional.
since attacks on identity
Moreover,
to information
lead
it becomes
distortion,
clearer why dialogue
and negotiation
often fail
and why conflicts persist over time and become
This perspective
institutionalized.
is supported
on how
the
small
of
research
by examining
body
intractable conflicts develop. This research sug
gests that intractable conflicts often begin when
a group's
identity is invalidated
by another

1986; Northrup, 1989; Zartman,

party (Kriesberg,
to how people
2005). Since
identity is central
sense of the world,
make
this invalidation
is
followed by a distortion of information
to fit
beliefs

& Davidson,
(Friedman
1999;
&
Rouhana
1989;
.Bar-Tal,
1998). As
Northrup,
communication
to deteriorate, bound
continues
aries between
"us" and "them" become more
normalized
rigid. Finally, conflicts can become
to
(Stock, 2001) as the conflicting parties begin
prior

to continue
the conflict (Crocker et al.,
2005; Northrup, 1989; Zartman, 2005).
of the centrality of identity in the
Because
conflicts we have discussed,
and
organizational
because
of its importance
in characterizing
in
in the literature
tractable
conflicts
(Coleman,
et al., 2004; Gray, 2003), we call
2003; Crocker
such conflicts
"intractable
identity conflicts."
The term highlights
that intractable
conflicts
are difficult to resolve largely because
parties
are trapped in ongoing mutual disidentification.
We now turn to a discussion
of resolution at
collude

tempts.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol,

Pratt, and

O'Connor

35

TABLE 1
Illustrative
Evidence
1980s-2007
Characteristic

O'Connor

Long-standing

Pressure

of Intractable

Examples

of IIC at a Community
& Annison,
(O'Connor
& Bujak,

Identity Conflicts
2007

in removal
resulted
from physicians
A long
of the prior two hospital
CEOs.
and mistrust was
history of competition
in the late
a

(Bradsher,

1990s,

third CEO.

As

1980s

Airlines,

2000; Bryant,

& Walsh, 2004;Wong, 2002)

2001)

to a head
again
coming
to oust
with an attempt

of IIC at United

Evidence

Hospital,
2002;

(IICs)

1994; Maynard

early as 1985, United Airlines

pilots went
on strike to protest
the persistent
diversification
strategies
pursued
by
were

who

CEOs
Edward

also

Carlson

and

continued

Conflicts

hoteliers

(e.g.,
later Richard
Ferris).
over the years and

became

Pervasive/chronically
salient

to agree
about
seemed
only one
no basis
for physician
thing: there was
trust at the hospital.
administrator
Senior
in their
leaders were unified
physician

Everyone

to remove

commitment
clearly
unified

defined

as

the CEO,

the enemy.
were
seen

physicians
from the point of view

administrators.

Expansion
original

dispute

was

leaders

and

senior

agree

attempts

the enemy

forwarded

company

who

should

could

between
disputes
pilots
team were about
management
Over
time,
security and wages.
to other areas,
spread
including

facilitate

and

was
at an
and administrators
physicians
and community
all-time
low, and patient
initiatives were hopelessly
at a standstill.
were
seen by physicians
as
of or
little understanding
for clinical
needs
and little
appreciation

Administrators
having

commitment

to the well-being
of patients.
as
were
seen by administrators

Physicians
neither understanding
impact

of their choices

implications

over a

made
span, employees
some ownership
to secure
before
they succeeded.

five
of the

by

to
but this was
unacceptable
physician,
their
who did not believe
administrators,
views would
be appropriately
represented,
action among
and vice versa. Unified

stereotypes

the crisis

typically
ignored,
vision was

retreat in the mid

1990s.
the upcoming
Medical
staff demanded
that it be a

Simplifying

after 1985,
in the ALPA and
(especially
were
critical of the
openly

team. Moreover,
management
remained
intense. For example,

as

administrators

about

of the period

employees
IAM unions)

seven-year

by the physicians.
generally
disregarded
was
clear: collaboration
One
thing was
little agreement
about
dead, and there was
the causes
of the tragedy. Medical
staff
not even

For much

These

of senior

Projects
leaders were
physician
and the administrative
beyond

who

fierce after 2002, with

especially
United's
filing for and subsequent
from bankruptcy.
emergence

nor appreciating
the
on costs and their

for long-term

financial

Original

the

job
conflict

mergers
the dropping
of Pacific
acquisitions,
routes, issues of employee
ownership,
and issues associated
with the company's
recent bout with

management
time to an

bankruptcy.
Employee
over
conflicts expanded
of unions
number
increasing

(e.g., flight attendants).

United's
and

management
other employees

no understanding

corporate
strategy.
viewed management

team viewed

pilots
little to
having
of finance and
as

in contrast,
Employees,
as too self

interested and uncaring.

They felt
did little to protect them.
management
on such
Given management
initiatives
issues

viability.

and

as

employee
evidence
as

seniority and subsequent

there is some
indirect
reactions,
was
that management
viewed

not understanding
culture and
airline
too driven by the bottom
line.
being
to the airline because
the damage
Despite
of poor employee-management
relations,
as

Zero-sum
conceptualizations

believed
take control of
they must
Physicians
in order to improve quality
of
the hospital
care. Administrators

believed
they must
in order to
of the hospital
of this
the financial
viability

take control
preserve
community

asset.

teams and
labor unions
management
their own interests separately,
pursued

one group's
seen as the others'
gains
loss. For example,
pilots and some other

with

(Continued)

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

36

Academy

of Management

Review

January

TABLE 1
(Continued)
Evidence
1980s-2007
Characteristic

O'Connor

of IIC at a Community
& Annison,
(O'Connor
& Bujak, 2001)

Evidence

Hospital,
2002;

2007

of IIC at United

1980s

Airlines,

2000; Bryant,

(Bradsher,

& Walsh, 2004;Wong, 2002)

1994; Maynard

that the management

believed
employees
in merger and acquisitions
team's success
came at a cost to their seniority system
and

their jobs. The management

saw failures
in these

contrast,
as major

Mutual
disidentification

Administrators

to its future profits.

blows
The management
team defined
itself as not
like pilots and some other employees
being
who only thought about
their own interests

identified
themselves
clearly
like those physicians
whom

as

not being
as complaining
a
they viewed
in their own personal
interested

lot, only
well

and

to examine
inflexible, and unwilling
being,
their own failings. For their part,
took pride in defining
physicians
as

themselves

well-being)
move
on

and

Pilots

costs

padding

themselves

a long-term
(versus having
to the community). Given

from managers
who, they
did not understand
the nature

the industry or the work

Both groups disparaged
one article
For example,

(versus patient
their resumes
to

commitment

not the company's

future profitability.
and other employees
disidentified

believed,

different from
distinctively
as
whom
they viewed

administrators,
focused on reducing

in

team,
endeavors

of

of the employees.
the other side.
stated

that

is dragged
down
says United
"management
in
labor contracts
by the most expensive
the business.
The unions maintain
that

that

each

itself in terms of being

group defined
to
different from the other, neither wanted
with the other's
listen to or be associated

has made
several horrendous
management
an ill-fated
business
moves,
especially
that was
attempt to buy US Airways

perspective.

blocked

last
by the Justice Department
is making
year. Now, they say, United
another by threatening a bankruptcy
filing,
a move
that would
probably wipe out the
value

IICs
Managing
"much analyt
Crocker et al. argue that while
ical work has focused on the causes
of these
to their
conflicts and the forces that contribute
there has been much
less re
intractability,"
in
search on "ending conflict in the so-called
tractable cases"
(2004: 4). Our review of the lit
erature
that research
has
suggests
yet to
or
around a specific set of techniques
coalesce
or managing
for resolving
models
intractable
reason for this fragmen
conflicts. One possible
tation may be that much of the work in this area
has focused on specific tactics that are useful in
of the conflict,
only certain aspects
for managing
such
prescriptions
eschewing
conflicts from their earliest
stages up through
the establishment
of enduring
intergroup har
research has addressed
the
mony. For example,
of emotion
management
through art, storytell
2006; Retzinger &
ing, or joking (e.g., Maiese,
managing

of stereotypes
Scheff, 2000) and the management
frames
through the shifting of conflict
(e.g.,

of UAL

stock"

(Wong, 2002: 2).

Putnam
& Wondolleck,
2003;
2003;
Gray,
Shmueli, Elliott, & Kaufman, 2006). More general
tactics have also been proposed,
the
including
of the general
delineation
skills (e.g., listening
and humility) needed by conflicting parties and
their mediators
(e.g., Portilla, 2006), along with
on how to run a workshop
specific suggestions
fordisputing parties
(e.g., Kelman, 2001; Kelman
or
& Cohen,
1986). Some fuller-scale approaches
models
been
have
to aid
developed?largely
an
in such conflicts1?in
third-party mediators
to
con
embrace
attempt
larger portions of the
flict management
1986;
process
(e.g., Linskold,
Rothman,

1
These

1997). However,

models

Intervention,
Reciprocated
Tomlinson

these models

have

include

Resonance,
ARIA?Antagonism,
and
(Rothman,
1997); GRIT?Graduated
in Tension
Initiatives
reduction
(Linskold,
1986;

Action

& Lewicki,
2006); MACABE?Motivation,
Affect,
and
the surrounding
Environment
Behavior,
Cognition,
(Pruitt & Olczak,
1995); and transformative mediation
(Bush &
Folger,

1994; Spongier,

1993).

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol

Pratt, and

and other con

typically used classic negotiation
flict management
techniques,
largely ignoring
the role of identity.
In the rare cases where
identity is mentioned
con
as being critical to resolving
intractable

are left
for its management
flicts, the specifics
or undefined.
For example, Northrup ar
vague
gued that "if change occurs in the identities of at
for long
the chances
least one of the parties,
term change are greatly increased, particularly
of identity
if the change
involves core aspects
that are directly related to the conflict" (1989: 78).

she did not specify how such identity

occurs.
The concept of identity negotia
change
tions has also been proposed
(Bar-Tal, Kruglan

However,

& Bar
ski, & Klar, 1989; Kelman, 2006; Rouhana
this work has
Tal, 1998). Here again, however,
in such a pro
failed to specify how to engage
of the
cess
in order to remove "the negation
other party as a central component of each par
ty's own identity" (Kelman, 2006: 23).
our review of the intractable
To summarize,
conflict
believed

that while
literature suggests
identity is
to be central to the formation and con

of intractable conflicts, there has

ceptualization
a systematic
at
not been
(to our knowledge)
of
to
how
the
understand
management
tempt
to
and
resolve
intractability
identity may help

sustained
facilitate
intergroup harmony. Our
to
this gap so as to
address
here is
purpose
enrich theory and build actionable
knowledge.

A MULTIPHASE MODEL FOR IIC RESOLUTION

is to delineate
goal of our model
in IICs can
mired
which
the phases
groups
by
move
toward enduring harmonious
intergroup
Dictio
International
relations. The Cambridge
as
harmonious
defines
nary
"peaceful," which
The ultimate

to a
and accord, in addition
agreement
assumes
that peo
lack of conflict. The model
to begin a change process does
ple's readiness
denotes

of itself, lead directly to intergroup

the foun
readiness
Rather,
provides
harmony.
for three distinct identity shifts through
dation
in order
the conflicting groups must pass
which
not, in and

inter
enduring harmony: decoupled
group identities, subgroup
identity security, and
dual identity strength. Each phase of our model
provides a necessary but not sufficient condition
to achieve

O'Connor

37

for enduring harmony,

tion of the prior phase

and successful
comple
to carry out
is necessary
of the model.
each subsequent
phase
Partly as a function of the different literature
on which we draw, particularly
social
identity

identification, much
theory and organizational
is focused on individ
of the process we describe
ual identity dynamics within an intergroup set
is inherently
the overall process
ting. However,
in that individual
multilevel
identity beliefs are
lower-level constructs (e.g., identity of an airline
to higher-level
constructs
pilot) that aggregate
(e.g., security of pilots' identity as a group). Ul
proposes
relationships
timately, our model
constructs
among higher-level
(e.g., nature and
identities and harmoni
strength of group-level
ous intergroup relations).

the
underlying
Figure 1 shows the four phases
interven
and the process
IIC resolution model
tions and states that mark the passage
through
The ovals on the left of the figure
these phases.
thought to lead to the
depict the interventions
review
states shown in the shaded
boxes. We
for
but do not provide
evidence
propositions
these main effects since
(1) each of them has
in existing research and (2) the
been discussed
results of these main effects are not consistent.
we
these inconsistencies,
forward
To explain

affect
about how previous
phases
propositions
ones.
subsequent
of the model with the
We begin our discussion
end state?enduring
ultimate
intergroup har
interventions
the process
discuss
mony?and
to achieve
such harmo
that have been proposed
then note the shortcomings
nious relations. We
in the context of intracta
of these interventions

that the accomplish

ble conflict and propose
ment of the model's
prior state (strong dual iden
these interventions more effective.
tities) makes
We continue with this pattern, using the limita
for
tions of current theorizing as the motivation
effects. Begin
proposing each of the moderating
of the model with the end
ning our discussion
us to demonstrate
at each phase
state allows
the prior state in order to
the need forachieving
one.
move on to the subsequent
at the top of the figure, we know
Beginning
that promoting
integrative goals and structures
in
lead to intergroup harmony. However,
may
the face of intractable conflicts, such goals and
structures are likely to be threatening unless
to identify with the su
both parties can begin
in addi
identity (e.g., a hospital)
perordinate

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

38

Academy

of*Management

Review

January

FIGURE 1
Intractable

Identity Conflict

(IIC) Resolution

Model

Enduring

tion to their own subgroup

identity (e.g., physi
as holding dual
cian or administrator)?known
identities. Research
that promoting si
suggests
multaneous
differentiation
and unity of inter

group membership
may promote dual identities
for the members
of each group, but only when
the superordinate
identity does not threaten the
its
distinctiveness
that provides
each group
inter
the prescribed
identity security. However,
ventions
for developing
identity security are
not likely to succeed unless
the mutual disiden
tification that is at the heart of IICs is resolved

the intergroup identities. Finally,

by decoupling
will not result from inter
identity decoupling
to promote
to
ventions
ability
participants'
reconsider
the nature of intergroup
mindfully
relations unless
they are ready to come to the
table (known as conflict ripeness).
negotiating
In sum, the move from one state to the next must
to the desired
harmony. The
of each phase
following expanded
descriptions
are organized
the components
of the IIC
around
in Figure
1.
resolution model depicted
to lead
be sequentially
ordered
outcome
of enduring
intergroup

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol,

Pratt, and

seem to be heresy. In fact,

goal would
each
be
subgroup's
identity may well
ac
is
that
threatened by a superordinate
goal

since

of managing
The challenge
intergroup con
theme in
flicts has been a central and consistent
for at least a
the study of intergroup relations

century (Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif,

1961; Sumner,
1906). The focus of this work has
sub
to get conflicting
tended to be on ways
as
see
to
themselves
groups
together
working

toward common
superordinate
harmoniously
can identify
each
that
of the subgroups
goals
with but that cannot be achieved
by any single
a
of
studies have
number
subgroup. Although

consistent with the view that

provided evidence
can learn to work
together
conflicting groups
if
goal (e.g.,
given a superordinate
harmoniously
Kahn & Ryen, 1972;Worchel, Andreoli, & Folger,
is
1977), the scope of these positive
findings

mostly limited to research using ad hoc groups

that have no history together. In studies of real
the findings have
life or preexisting
subgroups,
that
been inconclusive,
indicating
promoting su
reduce

con

them

(e.g.,
1980).
Brown, 1978; Skevington,
for bringing groups with
A related approach
different orientations
together has been struc
to
tural integration
promote self-categorization
as on the same team. The ra
of the subgroups
tionale is that such integration will lead to bet
of each other and a greater
ter understanding

of the many similar values and atti

the differences
of the "other," despite
that ignorance
may
1984). Assuming
(Cook,
cause prejudice
1984), this
(Stephan & Stephan,
in order to
seeks to reduce ignorance
approach
awareness
tudes

inte
Structural
intergroup harmony.
direct
include promoting
mechanisms
liaison
the parties, establishing
among
roles, and creating integrated teams and/or de
For
is mixed.
support
partments. Here again,
some
contact
intergroup
increasing
example,
enhance

gration
contact

intergroup harmony but to

times (Desivilya,
at
other
1998;
greater hostility
Worchel,
1986).
of the unique nature of
Our earlier discussion
IICs points towhy conflicts may actually worsen
times leads

39

common

and Structures
Integrative Goals
Promoting
to Enduring
Leads
Intergroup Harmony?But
Not Always

goals does not always

perordinate
even worsens
sometimes
flicts and

O'Connor

to greater

if a common set of superordinate

goals and/or
is imposed on group mem
structural linkages
share a long history of being
bers. If groups
a
bound
disidentification,
together by mutual

are
to the other subgroup, members
react
to
with
increased
levels
of
disiden
likely
tification. Structural mechanisms,
too,will likely
have
little impact at best. As we noted earlier,
ceptable

con
of intractable
of the characteristics
in the conflict tend to filter
flict is that parties
new information
to conform with their beliefs
new
The
information gained
1989).
(Northrup,
structural
therefore, is not
integration,
through
state
to
of
the
alter
the
ignorance about
likely
other. In fact, it is likely to be filtered in a selec
that provides
tive way
further support for the
one

negative

stereotypes.
evidence

from studies
of U.S.
that
decades
of
suggests
systems
to
and
integrate hospitals
attempts
structurally
or
(through joint ventures, mergers,
physicians
and decades
other structural mechanisms)
of
retreats
at
to
aimed
them
visioning
unifying
limited success
ward
have had
similar goals
one com
et al., 2006). For example,
(O'Connor
mon way
to structurally
integrate physicians
Significant
health care

and administrators
States was

United

in the 1980s and

1990s in the
own
direct
through hospitals'
was
The
that
practices.
logic

ership of physician
owned physician
ifhospitals
groups, they would
because
would
share the same
be aligned
they
most
For
the
and
part, these
objectives.
goals
to produce
failed
integrated systems
vertically
instead to a
the intended results, often leading
in physician
decrease
productivity and an in
crease
in ill sentiment toward the system (Holm,

there
2000). Under intractable conflict conditions
to take
for harmonious
relations
is little space
root from such integrative activities.
Social
identity theorists (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel &
Turner, 1979) have similarly noted that attempts
to bring subgroups
their
together, highlighting
oneness
in working
toward one set of superor
re
the unintended
dinate goals, might produce

sult of actually driving them farther apart. Horn

found that
(2000), for example,
sey and Hogg
and math-science
students showed
humanities
the strongest intergroup bias when the superor
dinate category
(university student) alone was
that since social
salient.
made
They argued
from group memberships
identities derive
and
with other groups, superordinate
comparisons
on what groups
that focus exclusively
goals
have in common can threaten a group's distinc

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

40 Academy

of Management

Review

January

tiveness.

were

effect?motivating
tity can have a boomerang
the desire to defend the neglected
subgroup and
the
the very group differences
thus highlighting
to
intended
attenuate"
360).
(2006:
strategy
are likely to be even more
These dynamics

both ethnic
intergroup harmony) by examining
identities: when members
and organizational
of
in a multiethnic
ethnic subgroups
school
high
a dual identity?that
is, identifying
experienced
with both their ethnic subgroup and the school
as a whole?there
was
decreased
intergroup
bias. In a similar vein, Bizman and Yinon (2004)

at
Such threats can lead to increased
from the
one's group
tempts to differentiate
the other
other and to an increased bias against
group (Crisp, Stone, & Hall, 2006). As Huo and
on a common
iden
Molina
note, "An emphasis

that share a long history of

with each other, espe
disidentifying
mutually
to
is perceived
if
the
goal
superordinate
cially
the interests of the outgroup
(Kries
encompass
as
identities are perceived
berg, 2003). When
zero sum, any gain for the outgroup will be seen
extreme

in groups

as a loss for the ingroup. For example, at United

and pilots have historically
Airlines, managers
as win-lose
and acquisitions
framed mergers
lose
if
endeavors
"win,"
managers
pilots
(e.g.,
we
that
while
Table
So
1).
agree
seniority?see
can
of superordinate
the development
pro
goals
vide a needed direction forgroups and integrat
their understanding
ing structures can enhance
of one another, these efforts are likely to fail if
in IICs.
have been engaged
group members

were
both activated
resistant
to
likewise
and Dovidio
(2000) re
intergroup bias. Gaertner
evidence
of the poten
ported further empirical
to minimize
tial for a dual
identity approach
the way
for
(and# thus, to pave
intergroup bias

noted
Israeli

Role

of Dual

Identity Strength

for a some
has provided
evidence
Research
for
counterintuitive
what
managing
approach
to
about
intergroup
bring
identity perceptions
&
Bachman,
Dovidio,
Gaertner,
harmony
(e.g.,
& Dovidio,
Banker, 2001; Gaertner
2000). When
identities are
both subgroup and superordinate
maintained
identities), one
(referred to as dual

can anticipate
of the oppos
greater acceptance
of
that
the
It
follows
adoption
ing subgroup.
of
dual identities will lead to greater acceptance
integrative goals or structures that incorporate
interests.
the opposing
subgroup's
identities have, in fact, been associated
Dual
with reduced
intergroup bias by group mem
in the Hornsey
and Hogg
For example,
described
student experiment
(2000) university
the least amount of intergroup bias oc
above,
curred in the dual identity condition, suggesting
of resisting
the least
likelihood
integrative
goals or structures. These results were recently
replicated by Crisp et al. (2006), who found that
students whose
training (e.g., hu
disciplinary
or science)
manities
and university affiliation
bers.

of dual
in
identities
contexts was
the only
would use a problem

secular-religious
predictor that individuals
forman
solving rather than a contentious mode
conflict.
We
theorize
that
both
aging
holding
identities predicted more of a problem-solving

it led to less intergroup bias,

to the possibility
members
of
group
opening
as
of
themselves
in
conceiving
having enough
common with their outgroup to look for solutions
on these
to both groups.
acceptable
Building
we
that
dual
identities
propose
strong
findings,
strengthen the impact of efforts to promote inte
grative goals and structures because
they re

mode

because

duce

intergroup bias

monious

The Moderating

that the perception

and

open

the door

for har

interactions.

1: The stronger the dual

Proposition
the
the probability
identities,
greater
that promoting
integrative goals and
structures will lead to enduring
inter
group

harmony.

Promoting
Intergroup Differentiation
to Dual
Leads
Identity Strength?But

and Unity
Not

Always
The literature on dual
identities
(e.g., Gaert
ner & Dovidio,
2000; Hornsey & Hogg, 2000) sug
to perceive
that priming people
them
gests
as both similar
to and different from
selves
members
of other subgroups
facilitates
the
of dual
identities. These
ideas have
adoption
into mainstream
yet to be widely
incorporated
conflict
theories.
As Brewer
organizational
(2001) has pointed out, the implicit assumption
in much of the work on intergroup identity con
flict has been that members'
to their
attachment
lead to outgroup hostil
ingroup will inevitably
it difficult, if not impossible,
to con
ity,making
ceive of developing
dual identities encompass

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

ing both

a subgroup
that includes
have
failed

Fiol

Pratt, and

a superordinate
Yet re
the outgroup.
to find any straightfor
and

identity
searchers
ward negative correlation between
ingroup pos
& Brown,
and
(Hinkle
intergroup hostility
itivity
level, positive
1990). Even at a physiological

to
evaluative
and negative
appear
processes
occur within different, independent
neurological
that may or may not be reciprocally
systems
activated
(Brewer & Brown, 1998). So increased
toward the ingroup does not nec
affect
positive
in increased
affect to
result
negative
essarily
to hold
it possible
the outgroup, making
ward
dual

identities without

significant

cognitive

dis

sonance.

and Brewer (2002) have referred to the

iden
to hold dual
identities as social
capacity
of
the
which
reflects
degree
tity complexity,
to
sub
exist
between
the
overlap
perceived
of. The less individuals
groups one is a member
to as shar
the
they belong
perceive
subgroups
same
same
the
members
the
and
prototypi
ing
Roccas

their social
the more
cal attributes,
complex
re
identities will be. Of course, the complexity
varies.
At
for
dual
identity development
quired
one extreme, when there is a sense of continuity
iden
the subgroup and superordinate
between
& Van Leeuwen,
tities (Van Knippenberg
2001),
both is relatively
straightforward.
promoting
They may easily coexist even when different, as

long as they are not inherently in conflict with

one another or mutually
For example,
exclusive.
in the multi
in the aforementioned
subgroups
ethnic high school field study, groups had dual
ethnic iden
identities that were unrelated?an
a
school
and
identity
high
tity
superordinate

(Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). Similarly, in lab stud

to
ies subjects have been successfully
primed
&
identities
dual
(Hornsey
adopt noncompeting
little
there was
Hogg, 2000). In these settings
and
conflict between
superordinate
subgroup
threaten
identities; they could coexist without
ing each other.
identities
At the other extreme,
strong dual
are more
to adopt,
and
difficult
for people
the
is
when
greater identity complexity
required
as conflicting with one
identities are perceived
another. Even if leaders attempt to promote new
identity frames that are not at odds with each
on mutual disiden
other (i.e., frames not based
tification), in settings with a long history of in
tractable conflicts, people may distort informa
tion (Northrup, 1989) and ignore the new frames.

O'Connor

41

of self in
conceptions
Implicit and overlearned
relation to the "other" often linger long after the
context shifts (Pelham & Hetts, 1999). If
actual
the subgroup and superordinate
identities con
to one another, it is
tinue to be seen as opposed

that people will adopt

strong
highly unlikely
dual
identities, even if they are primed to per
ceive both intergroup unity and differentiation.
This may explain why Gaertner
and his col
et
al.,
2001;
Gaertner,
Dovidio,
(Gaertner
leagues

& Banker,
Nier, Ward,
1999) found that in the
contexts of both banking mergers and blended
simultaneous
of sub
perceptions
stepfamilies,
differentiation
and
group
intergroup unity were
with less favorable
associated
intergroup rela
tions than perceptions
of a single unified group.

sa
authors
that the continued
speculated
lience of the earlier subgroup
identities
(along
with the superordinate
identity) may have been
as threatening
the primary goal of
perceived
The

the subgroups.
An alternative
and
combining
more
re
of
their
likely interpretation
perhaps
nature of threats to
the pervasive
sults, given
identities
(Brewer, 2001;
preexisting
subgroup
reverse
is
&
the
but com
2000),
Hogg,
Hornsey
the superordinate
interpretation:
plementary
as the more
have
been
identity may
emphasized
thus dominating
salient of the two identities,
each
subunit's
and
threatening
preexisting
was
seen as the
Since
identity.
amalgamation

families, it
primary goal of the mergers/blended
to assume
is reasonable
that intergroup rela
tions suffered in the dual identity condition be
cause
not have
members
felt secure
may
about
the
value
and
positive distinctive
enough
ness
of their preexisting
for suffi
subgroup
or be
to
dual
identities
ciently strong
develop

maintained.

The Moderating
Security

Role

of Subgroup

Identity

We suspect that if the subgroup identities had

been sufficiently secure in their distinctiveness
in the Gaertner
et al. (1999, 2001) merged banks
and stepfamily studies, the superordinate
iden
to
would
have
less
the
been
tity
threatening
ac
to
identities,
greater
prior subgroup
leading
of strong dual identities and an asso
ceptance
in intergroup bias. Berry's (1991)
that it is security in one's own
identity, not simply strong positive at

ciated decrease
work suggests

subgroup
titudes toward

one's

group,

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

that predicts

toler

42 Academy

of Management

of another group. Building on this work, we

that identity security (a feeling of safety
argue
or protection) may play a more
important role
than identity strength (positive attitudes
toward
one's own group) in reducing potential
threats.
to distinguish
between
Failure
security and
no
to
clear link
strength may help
explain why
ance

between
ingroup positivity and outgroup
have
been found (Brewer, 2001).
negativity
have found evidence
Researchers
supporting
iden
the notion that security in one's subgroup
is
with
of a
associated
greater acceptance
tity
ex
for
identity. Identity security,
superordinate
ages

to be integral to building
ample, appears
plu
ralistic societies where
subgroup and superor
are held
dinate
identities
simultaneously
&
& Wen
Brown, 1986; Mummendey
(Hewstone
Huo
Molina's
and
zel, 1999).
(2006) study of an
diverse
of Californians
ethnically
population
shows that minority groups
(e.g., African Amer
icans and Latinos)
that experience
the security
that comes
from subgroup
respect are more
a common Ameri
to
toward
feel
positive
likely
can identity (cf. Sidanius,
Feshbach,
Levin, &

Pratto, 1997). And although

they did not start out
with the condition
that subgroup
identities are
zero sum, Haslam,
and
(2003)
Eggins,
Reynolds
a model
that
(ASPIRe)
suggesting
developed
secure
must
in
first
be
delineating
subgroups
their own needs
before sub
(i.e., "subcasing")

can be integrated with superordi

group goals
nate goals. Common
to these treatments is the
in one's
that
assumption
security
subgroup
to
is
its
related
validated
distinctive
identity
ness from the superordinate
identity. As we have
to
build
noted, attempting
security by promoting
are similar is likely to backfire
how subgroups

2006).
(Huo & Molina,
While
identity security is important
subgroup
even in group settings where conflicts are rela
the
tively recent (e.g., in newly merged banks),

for the rejection of superordinate

iden
potential
is even
therefore dual
tities, and
identities,
in
have been steeped
greater when
subgroups
intractable
conflicts
Table
We
(see
1).
long-term
further argue that identity security?in
the form
es
of validated,
distinct subgroup
identities?is

pecially
important if subgroup and superordi
as competing with
nate identities are perceived
one another. Secure
identities create
subgroup
the psychological
to accept
safety necessary
dual
identities with
less defensiveness.
This
leads us to propose
that efforts to simulta

Review

January

and
promote intergroup differentiation
in
to
order
in
dual
the
identities
unity
develop
face of intractable
conflicts are more
likely to
succeed
ifmembers
feel secure and validated
in
their own distinctive
subgroups.

neously

secure
2: The more
fhe
the
the
identities,
greater
subgroup
the
si
that
of
promotion
probability
multaneous
differentiation
intergroup
to the develop
and unity will
lead
ment of strong dual identities.
Proposition

Promoting

Positive

Identity Security?But

Distinctiveness
Not Always

Leads

to

that subgroup members will

We have argued
feel less threatened by a superordinate
identity
if they feel secure in their own subgroup's
dis
tinctiveness. A number of researchers
have de
scribed
distinctiveness-inducing
techniques,

which

often highlight the unique and attractive

of the subgroup
1989;
(Ashforth & Maelf
qualities
&
Dutton, Dukerich,
1994; Fiol, 2002).
Harquail,
such as the use of inclu
Linguistic
techniques,
sive referents ("we"), which
strengthen group
serve a
bonds and make
feel special,
groups
similar

role (Cheney,
distinctiveness-defining
1983; Fiol,
1989). Finally,
engaging
subgroup
in common tasks that ignite their pas
members
sion about fulfilling a meaningful
purpose and

the unique purpose of their common

explaining
secure sub
tasks are other means
of developing
group identities (Fiol, 2002; Pratt, 2000). Implicit
in these techniques
is not just that groups are
to feel distinctive
made
but that such assess
ments are made
up the ingroup?
by building

that is, by promoting positive distinctiveness.

None of the research on promoting
subgroup
has addressed
the challenges
distinctiveness
of
are
when
in
mired
achieving
security
subgroups
IICs. We have noted that in such cases
clear
are indeed drawn be
lines of distinctiveness
tween the groups, but they are lines that pro

mote mutual

"dehumanization"
(Northrup, 1989:
based on negative
72)?distinctiveness
compar
we refer to as negative distinctive
isons?which
ness. Subgroup members
thus may well feel pos
secure
in
to the negative
relation
other,
itively
on negative
com
but this type of security based
is likely to block, rather than facilitate,
parisons
the development
of dual identities.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol,

Pratt

how identity security

has described
be
may
negative
compari
promoted by making
identification
sons, such as promoting
through
antithesis
1983). In the case of IICs,
(Cheney,
Research

by defining
mutually
subgroups
disidentify
to the "negative other."
in opposition
themselves
intractable conflicts in
As Gray argues, when
frames
volve negative
identity
(e.g., mutual dis
call
such "identity challenges
identification),
into question
how a group [the other'] has de
fined itself and even its very right to exist" (2003:

21). This occurs, for example, when physicians

in terms of places
of
define hospitals
primarily
care giving and view business-minded
admin
evil (O'Connor
istrators, at best, as a necessary

et al., 2006).
sources of a group's distinctive
Such negative
ness are likely to prevent members
from seeking
In
the
other
distinctiveness.
words,
positive
in IICs is
ironic condition of groups
somewhat
a sense of identity
that they have developed
on
of one
their
mutual
based
negation
security

another, therefore sensing no urgency to search

for other sources of positive distinctiveness
(Put
nam & Wondolleck,
2003). Thus, for example,
at
continued unabated
mutual disidentification
even when
the organization
United Airlines,
was in a state of bankruptcy
(see Table
1).With
out the removal
of negative
distinctiveness,
to
there is likely to be limited receptiveness
distinctive
for promoting
positive
techniques
ness in intractable
That is,
conflict situations.
feels good about its su
each subgroup already
the other, thus requiring no
periority vis-d-vis
further positive

distinctiveness.

The Moderating

Role

of Decoupled

Identities

as the
mutual disidentification
Relinquishing
source
each
of
identity se
subgroup's
primary
some
of the
acknowledgement
curity requires
even
world
other
of
the
view,
subgroup's
validity
if there remains bitter disagreement
(Kelman,
disidenti
2006). For this to occur, the mutually
or disentan
fied identities must be decoupled
so that one subgroup's
gled from one another
on the other's
not
is
dependent
identity security
demise.
opens
identity decoupling
Intergroup
the door for positively based
identity
subgroup
to take the place
of the negatively
security
based
security.
iden
The benefits of disentangling
subgroup
can be
disidentification
tities bound by mutual

and

O'Connor

43

from earlier research. For example,

extrapolated
some have argued
that under conditions where
are
in conflict but must be
identities
group
in an organization,
maintained
identities should
be compartmentalized
&
Foreman,
(Pratt
2000)
or bridge
to reconcile
before attempting
them
in our model,
(Pratt & Corley, 2007). Decoupling
or temporal
not
does
entail
however,
physical
or
of sub
separation
compartmentalization

& Simmons,
1986; McCall
(cf. Break well,
groups
state of
1978). Rather, it refers to a psychological
in IICs
Because
groups
separation.
engaged
in part, as not being mem
identify themselves,
en
bers of the opposing
subgroup, decoupling
tails cutting out those identity elements
that link
in the destructive
the two parties
dance of mu
tual disidentification.
It requires groups to let go

of the assumption
that "they" must lose in order
for "us" to win, opening
the possibility
for the
to
in
relate
less
destructive
parties
battling
ways.

comes
Most of the work on identity decoupling
out of research on intractable conflicts and in
ternational
In particular,
Kelman's
diplomacy.
and
Kelman
and Cohens
(1999, 2006)
(1986) ex
efforts to engage
Israelis and Palestin
ians in decoupling
from their negative
interde
stand as exemplars
of the need
for
pendence
to occur before either side can gain
this process
tensive

a strong positive
sense of self not linked to the
of the other. Participants
destruction
and ana
efforts contrib
lysts agree that these decoupling
to paving
uted significantly
the way to the early
between
the parties by creating an
negotiations
environment where the legitimacy of each side's
concerns was upheld and mutual disidentifica
tion was

broken down.
Building on this work, we

that identity
to develop
attempts
decoupling
precede
more
secure positive
identities
be
subgroup
cause
it removes
the negative
distinctiveness
must

that

limits

group members'
for promoting

argue

receptiveness

to

techniques
security
identity
the
through positive distinctiveness.
Decoupling
to make
identities before attempting
each one
more secure also reduces the risks often associ
ated with "strengthening"
former enemy groups
(i.e., an enemy group with a strong identity may

be more

of a threat if the situation

is seen as zero

thus offers the oppor

Identity decoupling
to respond to techniques
for
tunity formembers
own
their
(and
other)
pos
promoting
subgroup's
sum).

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

44

and
itive distinctiveness
sense
own
self.
of
their

to become

Academy

secure

of Management

in

3: The more complete

the
Proposition
the
intergroup
identity decoupling,
that promoting
greater the probability
will
distinctiveness
ingroup
positive
of subgroup
lead to the development
identity security.

to Decoupled
Leads
Promoting Mindfulness
Not
Identities?But
Always
Intergroup
to revise their overly
For subgroup members
stereo
simplified negative views and polarizing
the
types of the outgroup,
they must develop
patterns of
ability to let go of well-established
to see things anew?a
and to begin
perceiving
that has been referred to as mindful
capacity
ness (Fiol & O'Connor,
2003; Longer, 1989;Weick,
Sutcliffe, & Obstfeld,
three key characteristics:
of meaning,
categories
formation, and
(3) an

has
1999). Mindfulness
(1) the creation of new
to new in
(2) openness
awareness
of
implicit

to at least
The ability
perspectives.
multiple
led to
beliefs
that have
suspend
temporarily
based
identity security
negatively
subgroups'
of these three
from the development
derives
characteristics.

to sim
results from a reluctance
Mindfulness
(2003) described mind
plify. Fiol and O'Connor
as resulting
from
behaviors
less bandwagon
that share some
interpretations
oversimplified
of high levels of
of the same collusive
qualities
Pratt and
conflict
intractability.
intergroup
this black-and
Doucet
(2000: 213) illustrated
how a physician
white dynamic by describing
as "anti-patient and anti-profes
was perceived
to cooperate with a man
sion" when he began
care
aged
illustrates

The physician's
behavior
zero-sum
from mindless
His re
and behaviors.
perceptions
bandwagon
to
for
the
luctance
simplify allowed
possibility
care providers might not be all
that managed
to reconsider
the space
rela
bad, thus opening
with
In
the
international
them.
arena,
tionships
and Cohen
Kelman
(1999, 2006) and Kelman
in prob
(1986) similarly engaged
participants
provider.
a break

of
the main
purpose
lem-solving
workshops,
to help them form "more differenti
which was
ated images of the enemy" in order for the neg
to be dismantled
ative
intergroup dynamics
1998:
(Kelman,
194).

Review

January

The mindfulness
literature
ways
suggests
can be developed
that such differentiation
and
&
nurtured
2003; Longer,
1989;
O'Connor,
(Fiol
et al., 1999), often through interventions
Weick
third parties may
by third parties. For example,
for
the meaning
of
redefine,
conflicting parties,
new
attention"
kinds of ques
"paying
by asking
answers
to pre
tions, rather than demanding
re
questions
vailing
(having well-developed

in
conclusions
express
They may
sponses).
terms and main
tentative rather than absolute
tain ambiguity
around
relevant
issues
for as
as
to
the temptation
resisting
long
possible,
find early closure and clarity for the problem
atic issues. All of the strategies
for developing
to do with shifting
have
greater mindfulness
so as to discover unseen
assumptions
people's

possibilities.
tomind
We agree
that participants'
abilities
fully rethink the nature of the intergroup rela
of meaning
besides
tions, to see new categories
"us versus
them," and to be open to new infor
are necessary
mation
and perspectives
condi
tions

for intergroup
but
identity decoupling,
these are not always
sufficient conditions.
For
may mindfully
example,
although
physicians
the need to control costs in order to
understand
protect the long-term survival of their local hos
to
still be unwilling
pital, they may nevertheless
constrain spending
in their personal attempts to
save a particular
life. In the case of
patient's
cre
intergroup identity decoupling, mindfulness
ates the capacity or ability forpeople
to engage
in psychologically
breaking down the negative
coupling of identities. It does not create the will
ingness to do so.

The Moderating

Role

of Readiness/Ripeness

ifmindfully
Even
of doing so, why
capable
to take the first steps of
would
parties agree
given that their very identity secu
decoupling,
on the identities remaining nega
rity depends
tively coupled? As we noted, intergroup identity
when groups are engaged
in IICs
decoupling
to
that
of
their
requires parties
give up
part
on
that
is
based
the
other."
identity
"negative
This is extremely difficult, since in these types of
of the other is not a periph
conflicts, negation
eral or marginal
element
of each
subgroup's
can
that
be
discarded
(Kelman,
identity
easily
themselves
2004). In fact, the intergroup battles
are often a large part of each group's
identity

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol

Pratt

& Heppen,
2001;
Jussim, Wilder,
con
it
the
difficult
for
1989),
making
Northrup,
see
one
a
or
see
out
to
to
way
flicting parties
another as anything but the enemy. As Zartman
zero-sum
"clouds
identities
suggests,
holding
(Ashmore#

of a hurting stalemate,
the parties' perceptions
since itprovides
the righteous cause that thrives
on pain" (2005: 60). As a result, actions are inter

as unilateral,
affairs.
all-or-nothing
sources
of identity
the
negative
Cutting away
entails a willing
security (identity decoupling)
ness to at least temporarily enter into a state of

preted

level of uncertainty
identity insecurity?some
about one's identity. In the literature on interna
and
intractable
tional diplomacy
conflicts,
to take on identity insecurity is de
readiness

ripeness. For a conflict to be consid

to
both
parties must be motivated
ripe,
in
it (Pruitt & Olczak,
resolve
1995). Ripeness
to commit to a "change in the
volves a readiness
nature of the relations of the parties from a com
scribed

as

ered

to
orientation
destructive
petitive,
hopeless,
co-existence with po
wards a more cooperative
tential formutual
gain" (Coleman, 2000: 302).
is not likely until people per
Conflict ripeness
either great threat if they fail to give up
of relating or great benefit as a
the old ways
result of doing so. An existing body of research

ceive

on ripeness
antecedents:

identified two main

types of
shared
for significant
potential
recent,
gain. Specifically,
pain and/or mutual
a
common
or
near-miss
crises;
impending,
that the current situation
threat; the perception
to
incentives
is hurting both parties; or added
has

2002;
(Coleman, 2000; Fiol & O'Connor,
cooperate
Pruitt & Olczak,
1995; Zartman, 2005; Zartman &
to serve as
Rubin, 2000) have all been posited
to reconsider
motivators
for subgroup members

with the outgroup. Coleman

their relationship
forces
has
that negative
further
(2000)
argued
add
that induce conflict ripeness may actually
stress to an already burdened
rela
additional
that removing obstacles
tionship. He suggests
that prevent ripeness
mistrust;
(e.g., decreasing
Tomlinson & Lewicki, 2006) may be a more effec
tive means
of encouraging
ripeness. Whatever
have to be strong enough
the driver, conditions
to cut through
pain or gain)
(e.g., significant

in
information processing
distorted
members'
in
to engage
the necessity
order to recognize
to come to the table,
change. Once motivated
in conflicting groups are likely to be
individuals

and

O'Connor

45

more

to mindfully
willing
disentangle
identity from that of their "enemy."
Proposition
the greater
to promote

will

lead

identities.

4: The riper
the probability
participants'
to decoupled

their

the conflict
that efforts
mindfulness
intergroup

In summary,
the IIC resolution model
pro
that the path from intractable
conflict to
involves moving
intergroup harmony
enduring
a
series
of
states?from
conflict ripe
through
ness to decoupled
to sub
identities,
intergroup
group identity security, to strong dual identities,
and, finally, to enduring harmonious
intergroup
relations. After the initial state of ripeness, each
state is accomplished
of
through the application
a specific set of interventions, moderated
the
by
the process,
1). To begin
prior state (see Figure
free from their
subgroup members must break
an outcome
mutual disidentification,
facilitated
conflict
and
the
ripeness
promotion of mind
by
fulness. The resulting decoupled
identities may
since mutual
be insecure, especially
antipathy
of each sub
may have been a large component
that
group's
identity. Thus, we have suggested
leaders strengthen ingroup identity security by
the groups' positive
distinctiveness.
promoting
are
identities
validated
and se
Once
subgroup
the solid
cure, they are more likely to provide
to adopt a dual identity,
foundation fromwhich
an outcome
that is facilitated by the simulta
neous
of intergroup differentiation
promotion
poses

and

hold
unity. And only when group members
strong dual identities will the promotion of inte
be likely to lead to sus
grative goals/structures
tained intergroup harmony.
Groups may not need to begin this process at
the "beginning"
if readi
readiness)
(developing
ness already exists; they may not require inter
if they are not cur
group
identity decoupling

mutual
disidentification;
rently experiencing
may
promoting positive
ingroup distinctiveness
secure
if the groups are already
be unnecessary
in their (positive) subgroup
identities; and pro
moting intergroup differentiation and unity may
not be needed
if they already
hold strong dual
our model posits that each
identities. However,
of the prior states must be developed
if it does
not already exist in order to achieve
subsequent
states in the model.
the phases
of
Although we have delineated
as strictly sequential
this process
and distinct

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

46

Academy

of Management

that itwill often

from each other, we recognize
to begin
the subsequent
be necessary
phase
one. The
the preceding
before fully completing
of decoupling
encourages
greater
beginning
facilitates
ripeness;
positive
identity security
of disidentification;
seeing
letting go of aspects
of holding
dual
identities
the possibility
that

the conflicting
reduces
encompass
subgroups
risk of enhancing
the security of
the potential
to promote compelling
each one; and beginning

struc
and/or
integrative
superordinate
goals
an overarching
tures gives subgroup members
to iden
vision with which to identify, in addition
own
with
their
thus
facilitat
subgroup,
tifying

of dual identities. Our em

ing the development
on
the
of the
necessary
sequencing
phasis
some
not
out
rule
that
should
de
thus,
phases,
each
consecutive
of
between
gree
overlap
phase
is likely.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Theoretical

Implications

The main
contribution
of the IIC resolution
in
is the identifi
model
this
paper
developed
cation of an ordered
series of process
inter
move
states
to
ventions
and necessary
prior
from intractable conflict to intergroup harmony.
three
Subject to empirical verification, we make
to the literature on intractable
contributions
conflicts. First, we enrich this research by intro
the first com
ducing what is, to our knowledge,
model

of intractability management
prehensive
that puts identity center stage in the process. As
extant work on resolving
noted earlier, much

intractable conflicts has failed to systematically

consider the role that social
identity can play in
the resolution of these conflicts. This oversight
may be one reason why past attempts to man
age these conflicts have met with mixed results
and why calls continue
for new insights into
these
conflicts
managing
(e.g., Burgess & Bur
et
Crocker
al., 2004).
gess, 2006;
Second, we infuse much of the practice-based
research on intractable
conflicts with insights
from various
derived
theoretical
traditions. We
draw most extensively
from social
identity the
was
to examine
since
this
ory,
theory
designed
arise
conflicts
that
between
and
"impersonal"
&
Turner,
1979)?condi
among groups
(Tajfel
tions that are mirrored, but historically
intensi
in
intractable
conflicts.
fied,
Specifically, we be

Review

January

on intractable
that research
conflicts,
has only rarely drawn from social identity
1998, and Seull,
1999, for
theory (see Desivilya,
can be greatly enriched by
notable exceptions),
the states and
incorporating
intervening pro
cesses
that lie between
getting conflicting par
lieve

which

ties to the table

(ripeness)

and

creating

endur

ing intergroup harmony.

areas
for further
Third, our model
highlights
research on the management
of intractable con
flicts. For example,
while
research has recog
nized
the role of emotion
2003; Sen,
(Coleman,
2006; Putnam & Wondolleck,
2003), the link be
tween identity and emotions
in such conflicts
has gone largely unexamined.
We have argued
that emotions are central to the mutual disiden
tification process
since parties
fail to verify the
of
the
other
also
Burke, 1991, and
(see
legitimacy
as Sen (2006)
Burke & Harrod,
2005). However,
has noted, identities are also a source of pride

and therefore positive emotion. During intracta

ver
ble conflicts, identities are simultaneously
ified by ingroup members
and not verified by
This suggests
that mixed or
outgroup members.
ambivalent
emotions may play a heretofore un

role in these conflicts (Wang & Pratt,

explored
that ambivalent
create
Given
emotions
2008).
and
toward
may amplify attitudes
instability
others (Katz & Glass,
1979), special care must be
taken throughout
the management
to
process
mem
avoid magnifying
minor dislikes
among
into hatred.
Finally, and more

bers

broadly, our model has the

to
to research
contribute
in areas be
potential
intractable
conflicts.
It
the
yond
highlights
mixed
results of intervention efforts (e.g., pro
does not always
lead to
moting mindfulness
and presents moderating
identity decoupling)
states to explain
them. As such, the model con
tributes to research on dual identities, identity

security, and
intergroup
identity decoupling.
Our model also resonates with research on de
conflict. Diversity
have
researchers
mographic
an
the
limitations
in
inherent
long recognized
assimilation
where
the
paradigm
superordinate
and in a differentiation par
identity dominates

where
identities
dominate
adigm
subgroup
are
&
These
(Thomas
Ely, 1996).
paradigms
in
intractable
conflicts.
To
equally
implausible
the degree
that the parallels
hold, diversity re
search may benefit from a model
that involves

both securing subgroup

ening dual identities.

identities

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and

strength

2009

Practical

Fiol,

Pratt, and

Implications

our model
a number
presents
Implementing
In the beginning
of
of leadership
challenges.
the process,
leaders must be aware
that re
sources and
interests?not
just identities?are
In fact, if researchers
who study
problematic.
conflict ripeness are correct, leaders must rec

issues
ognize that resource- and interest-based
as
more
be
may
initially
perceived
legitimate
to the
than identity issues for bringing people
the decoupling
table and beginning
process
2000; Pruitt & Olczak,
1995; Zartman,
(Coleman,
2005). So even though intractable conflicts often
it
begin when a group's
identity is invalidated,
not be possible
to begin
the healing
pro
issues of identity. This is likely to
around
too threatening. Resourceand inter
feel much
issues may be a safer way to initially
est-based

may
cess

to come to the table.

people
as people move
In the first few phases,
from
to
leaders
their
identities,
securing
decoupling
must do two things in very close order: (1) pro
mote a more differentiated view of the outgroup
and (2) promote a more unified view of the in
are
group. For example, even though physicians

motivate

a diverse

lot, administrative
personnel who find
tend to view them stereotypi
them problematic
lead
cally as a single entity ("the" physicians),
ing to a bipolar dynamic, which must be over

come by promoting differentiated

images of "the
other." In the next phase
leaders must promote
more unified images of the ingroup. For exam
do not think of themselves
ple, most physicians
as belonging
to one unified physician group and
do not strongly identify with one another except

in their common animosity

toward administra
et al., 2006; see Table
tion (O'Connor
1). By re
leaders are, in
that negative
stimulus,
moving
individuals
of one
fact, stripping
important
source of their ingroup identity, making
it essen
tial tomove

to positive

ingroup identity
quickly
In
need to toggle
leaders
fact,
may
development.
of
between
the two phases, with the promise
as
a
to
motivator
strip
subgroup security serving
distinctiveness.
away negative
as leaders
focus on
In the next few phases,
dual

identities and integrative

they face the substantial

goals
developing
chal
and structures,
to
exert
of
members
motivating
lenge
subgroup
on behalf of both their ingroup and
themselves
the superordinate
the out
group that includes
move
must
To
members
start,
group.
ingroup

O'Connor

47

that outgroup members

beyond understanding
hold multiple
identities to realize that they do as
well (i.e.#social identity complexity).
In addition,
a
the simultaneous
of
and
subordinate
adoption
that
the
latter
superordinate
identity requires
not be too closely aligned with either subgroup
resistance
from the
identity in order to avoid
other group. Subgroup
is a
identity projection
or
defensive mechanism
threat
against
identity
loss and occurs when a subgroup perceives
it
self to be more similar to, typical of, and norma

tive for the inclusive superordinate

identity cat
than
the
other
egory
subgroup
(Mummendey &
This
is
then used as a
Wenzel,
1999).
projection
basis
for devaluing
the outgroup, which
is per
to be less similar
ceived
to the superordinate
for example,
this oc
identity. In some airlines,
curs when executives
claim market power as a

to be
superordinate
identity, which may appear
a projection
of the administrative
(versus the
or
of
the
airline
aviation)
(see Ta
pilot
identity
ble 1). To avoid
such projection,
leaders must
pay attention to the goals of the subgroups and
the superordinate
group. In their ASPIRe model,
Haslam
and colleagues
(2003) suggest doing this
that build on
by creating superordinate
goals
the needs

and goals of the subgroups

(i.e., "su
a
and
feedback
creating
percasing")
system
such that members
of each subgroup can partic
(i.e., "or
process
ipate in the joint goal-setting
ganic

goal setting").
the literature on conflict
Finally,
although
discusses
the
conditions
under which
ripeness
enter
will
into
the
parties
phase, we
decoupling
know very little about when
to proceed
to each
our
in
In
model.
other
words,
subsequent
phase
when are the disidentified
identities
subgroup
se
to begin developing
sufficiently decoupled
cure ingroup identities, the subgroup
identities
sufficiently secure to begin dual identity devel
the dual
identities
opment, and
sufficiently
to
strong
promote
integrative goals and struc
tures? People's
visible behaviors
and language
what
do
what
and
(i.e.,
they
they say) are indi
cators of shifting identity boundaries.
For exam
of
who
time
with
whom
and
ple, patterns
spends
symbolic marking
(Brown, Lawrence,

of shared
& Robinson,
affiliations.

intergroup
2005) may

space
reflect

too,
group
Language,
a marker,
repre
indicating people's
sentations
of themselves
and
their ingroup
For
Fiol de
1983;
Fiol,
1989).
(Cheney,
example,
scribed how changes
in the language
at Tech

changing
serves as

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

48

Academy

of Management

an iden
Co# a technology company undergoing
revealed
the
transformation,
changing
tity
with the old "we"
of employees
identifications
and with the new
identity the company was
can reflect the
that
noting
assuming,
"language
individuals
strength of the relationship between
can
Leaders
and their social groups"
(2002: 663).
in moving
the progress
therefore determine
through each phase of the process we have de
to people's
behavioral
and
scribed by attending
cues.
linguistic

Next Steps
we believe
IICs are highly complex. While
a
must
that managing
key role in
identity
play
are
there
these
additional
conflicts,
resolving
of
this
the
issues, beyond
scope
paper, that must
as research
in this area moves
be addressed
some of our arguments
forward. For example,
from research on intrac
have drawn explicitly

table conflicts?a
that, to date,
body of research
with
conflicts
be
has been concerned
largely
tween societal
nations,
groups
religious
(e.g.,
that there
and ethnic groups). We acknowledge
that can impact
may be important differences
across
relations
diverse
settings, as
intergroup

for
of proposed
the success
approaches
is
difference
resolution. One
obvious
how
information
which
may impact
group size,
within and be
is disseminated
and processed
as well as the types of
tween the subgroups,
interactions
that are likely. Issues of size also
raise issues of scale. That is, how many people
from each group need to be involved in the con

well as
conflict

in order for the mem

flictmanagement
process
to feel that their
bers of the conflicting parties
needs have been adequately
(Bur
represented
in organizations
gess & Burgess, 2006)? Groups
in
groups
may also differ from ethnonational
their boundary permeability, with some types of
that are more per
groups having memberships

manent

or more

than others (Mum

permeable
& Blanz,
1999;
Mielke,
Wenzel,
Klink,
mendey,
how
much
For
&
Turner,
1979).
Tajfel
example,
on one's
more
threatening are conflicts based
an
in
Palestin
ethnic
group
membership
(e.g.,
ian) versus a professional
group
(e.g., physi
sa
cian)? Are there differences of membership
which may
historical
significance,
more
or
less
conflicts
intense?
identity
research
that tests our propositions
Future

lience
make

and

Review

January

im
should pay special attention to the potential
of
these
differences.
pact
We have also very deliberately
omitted refer
ence to the impact of relative subgroup
status
our model. Large inter
and power in developing

status and power

would
asymmetries
one
over
to
domination
lead
of
the
group
likely
the conflict. Al
other, effectively suppressing
status or power differ
though less pronounced
are potentially
in any of our
entials
relevant
is
the
specific impact
complex and dif
phases,
ficult to predict. Dovidio, Gaertner, and Validzic
a study that ma
conducted
(1998), for example,
status
the
relative
of
groups on the
nipulated
same and different dimensions
of their task ex
group

status between
two groups
Equal
on
same
the
task
intergroup
working
produced
when
eliminated
the
bias, but the bias was
areas
were
of
distinct
and
val
expertise
groups'
perience.

that the effects of status are

ued. This suggests
not direct but involve other intervening vari
ables. Similarly, Rouhana
and Fiske (1995) con
cluded that although
Israelis were perceived
by
Arab and Jewish students as holding more insti
tutional
such as

elements
(control of tangible
power
the economy)
than Arabs,
this was ac
companied
by a sense of threat rather than se
was apparently
which
due to the Arabs'
curity,

to determine
latent power
their own
to
and
endure.
This
that
suggests
identity
ability
is
not
at
also
all
determining power asymmetry
cannot
and
to
be
related
easily
straightforward
of
to
threat.
We
it
leave
experiences
intergroup
to flesh out these important
future research
power and status dynamics.
there is a need to test and refine the
Naturally,
can
model we have proposed. Multiple methods
or
be used to examine
the
specific hypotheses
entire model.
For example, we make a strong
greater

claim
that decoupling
is
intergroup identities
to promote positive
critical if attempts
ingroup
are to lead to subgroup
distinctiveness
identity
3). A strong test of this
security
(Proposition
would
be to conduct
field experi
proposition
ments where groups facing intractable conflicts
in one organization
simply received
positive

about
their respective groups, while
messages
in another organization
these positive
ingroup
were
with
the techniques
messages
coupled
used

for intergroup identity decou

by Kelman
pling. Subgroup
identity security scores in each
could
be compared.
A weaker
organization
test?one
that might miss some of the historical

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

Fiol,

Pratt, and

a
involve conducting
of IICs?may
dynamics
re
are
where
subjects
experiment
laboratory
on the results from a screening
cruited based
levels of mutual
that assesses
questionnaire
with a relevant outgroup
disidentification
(e.g.#
Re
and conservative
liberal Democrats
in
the
As
in
the
United
States).
quasi
publicans
control groups receiving pos
field experiments,
can be
their ingroup
about
itive messages
on
their
identity scores
subgroup
compared
for
identity secu
pretest subgroup
(controlling
mes
both
with
those
positive
receiving
rity)
interventions.
sages and decoupling
can be examined
via either
The entire model
former
or
The
static
pro
analyses.
longitudinal
of
the impact
information
vides
regarding
on
the
of
variables
of
each
levels
pre
present
active

the latter pro

dicted model outcomes, whereas
of altering
a
test
of
the
vides
implications
a
manner
consistent
in
variables
model
levels of
we
test
it stati
our
Whether
with
propositions.
we
that
or
reemphasize
cally
longitudinally,
where
our
model proposes
(1)
phases
sequential
and main
all prior states must be achieved
to have the
variable
for
each
tained
moderating
not
this
and
effect,
(2)
may
always
proposed
interventions
that the proposed
begin
require
in
In many
conflict
with establishing
ripeness.
we
tractable identity settings, however,
suspect
to rethink long-held
that there is little readiness
for inter
the need
identity beliefs, suggesting

to begin by establishing
conflict ripe
ventions
ness. In such cases
interventions guided by our
at this earliest
to begin
need
would
model
move
and
(see Figure 1)
through all of the
phase

in our propositions.
phases
presented
entail
of our model would
A static analysis
vari
model
the
of
measurement
of
each
survey
indi
collect
ables. One would
multiple
ideally
cators (e.g., different indicators of dual identity
a continuum.
along
strength), each measured
scores
from the indi
of
agreement
Within-group
measures

[1998] "dispersion
(see Chan's
to assess
the
then
be used
could
model")
the
state.
For
of
each
greater
example,
strength
their
who perceive
the proportion of members
across
secure
to
be
multiple
identity
subgroup's
construct
the stronger the group-level
measures,
conse
of subgroup
and,
identity security,
vidual

effects of
the stronger the moderating
quently,
will
be.
identity security
subgroup
involve
The first phase of static testing would
a regression analysis
of the proposed moderat

O'Connor

49

ing effects of different levels of ripeness on the

mindfulness
between
promoting
relationship
within
the
and intergroup identity decoupling
that similar efforts
data set. Our model proposes
lead to different
will
to promote mindfulness
of
owing to differ
identity decoupling,
degrees
ences
in conflict ripeness
1). Vari
(see Figure
ance in degree of decoupling
allows one to test
effect of intergroup identity de
the moderating
on
between promoting
the
relationship
coupling
distinctiveness
and subgroup
ingroup
positive
in the
differences
identity security. Similarly,
level of identity security in the sample allow a
effect of identity security
test of the moderating
inter
on the relationship
between
promoting
and
dual
identity
group differentiation/unity
test the moderating
strength. Finally, one would
effect of dual identity strength on the relation
integrative
promoting
goals/
ship between
structures and intergroup harmony.
The truest test of our model would be a longitu
that followed how conflicting
dinal approach
over
time through the sequential
evolve
groups
this as
model.
of
the
One way to assess
phases

be to conduct multi
pect of our model would
case studies.
method, multiple-site,
longitudinal
The testwould start with a single case, ideally in
an organization where parties in identity conflict
are in a state of readiness but not mindfulness
(the
been
for readiness
conditions
already
having
would
in extant research). Researchers
shown
and assess
then begin by promoting mindfulness
ing its influence on all of the other states in our
intergroup identities, sub
(e.g., decoupled
group identity security, dual
identity strength,
should involve the use of
etc.). Such assessments
data sources, such as interviews, sur
multiple
model

At "Time 2" researchers

veys, and documents.
continue the first intervention in order to
would
the subsequent
maintain
the state moderating
of
the
model
intergroup
(e.g., decoupled
stage
to the next proposed
inter
identities), in addition
ingroup distinc
(e.g., promoting positive
their joint effects.
tiveness), in order to determine
the ef
researchers would examine
Once again,
fects of these interventions on all of the states in
our model. Such assessments
would continue to
sets of interventions outlined in
follow subsequent
our model, ending with an examination
of all in
terventions on the impact of promoting integrative
vention

this
1). Throughout
(see Figure
goals/structures
would
researchers
incorporate pattern
process,
(Yin, 2003) whereby
they
techniques
matching

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

50 Academy

of Management

would
the empirically
based
compare
pattern
with a predicted one?that
is# the results of the
interventions with our predicted results.
re
After conducting
this initial case analysis,
two types of cases.
searchers
should pursue
should
involve organizations
First, some cases
similar to those in the initial
facing conditions
case study (e.g., in a state of intractable conflict)
in order to see whether results can be replicated.
some cases should be contrasting
Second,
(e.g.,
in a similar type of organization
where
there is
no intractable conflict) to see if the absence
of
intractable conflict can also be predicted by our
model
identities are present,
identi
(e.g., dual
cases
ties are secure, etc.). These
subsequent

to confirm or refine our model

be used
the
1947; Yan & Gray,
(Lindesmith,
1994). While
use of case analyses
to test theory is not com
mon in organizational
research, it is not without
precedent. For example, Lee, Mitchell, Wise, and
case study de
Fireman
(1996) used a multiple
sign to conduct the first test of their unfolding
model of voluntary turnover.
The measures
intervention
and
techniques
to test our model already
exist. For ex
needed
our states (the shaded boxes in
ample, to assess
can be
1), several
existing measures
Figure
could

of intergroup harmony have been

& Gaertner,
1998).
(e.g., Banker
identities can also be ascer
Strength of dual
tained using existing
identification measures

used.

Indices

developed

(e.g., Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000; Mael & Ashforth,

of
1992), and Huo and Molina's
(2006) measure
to approxi
respect can be adapted
subgroup
mate
subgroup
identity security. Kreiner and
Ashforth's
scale can be
(2004) disidentification
to examine mutual
disidentification?
adapted
of decoupled
the opposite
identi
intergroup
ties?with
the target of disidentification
being
the opposing
be embar
group
(e.g., "I would
to be part of (add competing
rassed
subgroup's
of conflict ripeness
name)").
Finally, measures
have already been developed
2000).
(Coleman,
The IIC resolution model's
interventions
(the
in Figure
ovals
from
1) can also be adapted
For example,
for
existing practices.
techniques
have been developed
promoting mindfulness
to build
(Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001). Interventions
as well as to
positive
subgroup distinctiveness
simultaneous
promote
intergroup differentia
tion and unity can draw on Cheney's
(1983) rhe
torical techniques
(e.g., using "we" when talking
at the relevant
about
level).
group members

Review

January

finally, numerous
for promoting

have

been
and
goals
(e.g., creating superordinate
goals).
To conclude, the repercussions
of IIC have long
been known on the international stage. According
to Coleman
(2003), nearly one-sixth of the worlds
is engaged
in or on the verge of engag
population
conflicts. And in a recent
ing in identity-based

And,

proposed
structures

techniques
integrative

review of the literature, Burgess and Burgess re

ferred to intractable conflict as, "arguably,
the
most destructive
force on the planet"
(2006: 183).
in organizational
researchers
studies
However,
are only recently converging on the role of identity
in protracted organizational
conflicts and are only
assess
to
the
that can ensue
beginning
damage
from them. As professional
to take on administrative

continue
organizations
as
layers,
nonprofes
sional organizations
increasingly depend on pro
fessionals, and as organizations
globalize and be
come more diverse, we believe
that a focus on

managing

IICs

is long overdue.

off-site retreat sessions,

tensions be
During
tween physicians
and administrators
at the
reduced
community hospital were
temporarily
that created readi
through a series of exercises
ness to at least consider possibilities
beyond all
out warfare.
on this
to capitalize
Attempting
initial ripeness,
the retreat
leaders
initiated
three short-term projects jointly sponsored by at
least one physician
and one administrator
that
to have
measurable
appeared
recognizable,

benefits
for both groups.
The involved physi
cians and administrators
that theywould
agreed
return to this larger retreat group within a few
to report their outcomes
weelrs
(hopefully dem

that they could work together effec

the foundation for the
tively), thereby providing
that was
recommended
follow-up work
by the
consultants. However,
the follow-up work to de
the intergroup
sub
identities, enhance
couple
group security, and develop
identity strength
within both physician
and administrator
groups
onstrating

never

occurred.

While

recognition of their mutual

interdepen
gained
during the retreat and follow-up
reduced conflict in the
projects led to somewhat
short run, agreement
regarding larger initiatives
was never reached. Tensions continued
to build
to the point where
the CEO contacted one of the
dence

that he return and again

consultants,
requesting
disarm the conflict that was once more threaten
that she had seen no
ing her job. She explained

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009

need
mended

Fiol,

Pratt, and

to do the intermediate steps he had recom

and had, instead, immediately
initiated

conversations

about

creating

ment among all involved as

ing the intergroup conflict

common

agree

for reduc
to our
(according

moving

moting
clined

(O'Connor,

B. E., & Mael,

theory and
Review,

identity
of Management

R. D., Jussim, L., Wilder,

Ashmore,
D., & Heppen,
a social
Conclusion:
Toward
identity framework

the
14:

J. 2001.
for in

L. Jussim, & D. Wilder

tergroup conflict. In R. D. Ashmore,
conflict, and conflict
(Eds.), Social
identity, intergroup
213-249. New York: Oxford University
Press.
reduction:
Azar,

E.

1986. Protracted

tions.

international

In E. E. Azar

conflict

resolution:

&

J.W.

Theory

conflicts:

Burton
and

Ten proposi
International

(Eds.),

practice:

28-39.

B. S., & Gaertner,

S. L. 1998. Achieving
An intergroup-relations
harmony:
approach.
12: 310-325.
Family Psychology,

Banker,

Sussex,

stepfamily
Journal of

A. W., & Klar, Y. 1989. Conflict

termi
Bar-Tal, D., Kruglanski,
nation:
An epistemological
of international
analysis
cases.
Political
10: 233-255.
Psychology,
R. P. 2000. Self-categorization,
affec
Bergami, M., & Bagozzi,
as distinct as
tive commitment
and group self-esteem
British Jour
pects of social
identity in the organization.
of Social

39: 555-577.

Psychology,

and managing
multicultural
Berry, J. 1991. Understanding
ism: Some possible
in Canada.
of research
implications
Psychology

and

Developing

Societies,

A., & Yinon, Y. 2004. Intergroup

as related
to perceptions
strategies

Bizman,

separate
126.

groups.

K. 2000. Airline

Bradsher,

deal:

://query. ny times.

http

of Social

Journal

The

organizations.
577-594.

New
Brewer,

conflict management
of dual
identity and
144: 115?

Psychology,

unions.

New

York Times,
=

com/gst/fullpage.html?res

1986. Coping
York: Methuen.

M.

conflict:
hate?
Social

G. M.

B. 2001.

with

S. 2005. Territoriality
Review,

between

(Ed.), Differentiation
the social

in

of Management

Academy

we
fall: An analysis
J. 1978. Divided
sections
of a factory work-force.

R.

Brown,

Bunker,

between

30:

of relations

In H. Tajfel
in
Studies
groups:
relations:
395-429.

social

of intergroup
psychology
Academic
Press.

threatened

identities.

B., & Lewicki,

B., Alban,

and

Ingroup
intergroup
does
love become
ingroup
outgroup
In R. D. Ashmore,
L. Jussim, & D. Wilder
(Eds.),
When

conflict, and
identity, intergroup
tion: 17-41. New York: Oxford University

conflict

resolu

Press.

In D. T.
relations.
Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. 1998. Intergroup
of
Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey
(Eds.), The handbook

Ideas

in currency
in
of Applied

dry? Journal

and the frontier

Burgess, H., & Burgess, G. 2006. Intractability
of the field. Conflict Resolution
24: 177-186.
Quarterty,
and
Burke, P. 1991. Identity processes
56: 836-849.
Review,
Sociological

social

Burke, P., & Harrod,

of a good

Psychology

2005. Too much

stress. American

thing? Social

68: 359-374.

of mediation:
J. P. 1994. The promise
Folger,
to conflict
and rec
through empowerment
San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

R., &

Bush,

M.

Quarterly,

Responding
ognition.
D.

Chan,

1998. Functional

same

content

of Applied

Journal

relations

constructs
in the
among
different
levels
of analysis.
83: 234-246.
Psychology,

domain

at

G. 1983. The rhetoric of identification

and the study
Cheney,
of organizational
communication.
Journal of
Quarterly
69: 143-158.
Speech,
P. 2000. Fostering
in seemingly
intracta
ripeness
An experimental
Jour
study. International

Coleman,
ble

conflict:

nal

of Conflict

P. 2003. Characteristics

Coleman,

conflict:
work-I.

Toward
and

Peace

9: 1-37.
S. W.

Cook,

11: 300-317.

Management,

texts.

of protracted,
intractable
the development
of a meta-frame
Conflict:
Journal of Peace
Psychology,

1984. Cooperative
In N. Miller
& M.

racf: The psychology

FL: Academic
Press.

interaction

Crisp,

in multiethnic

con

B. Brewer

in con
(Eds.), Groups
of desegregation:
155-185. Orlando,

C. 1922. Human
nature
Cooley,
ed.). New York: Scribner.

and

the social

order

(revised

& Hall, N. 2006. Recategorization

R., Stone, C,
and
identification:
and
subgroup
Predicting
preventing
threats from common
and Social
ingroups.
Personality
Bulletin,

Psychology
Crocker,

identification

R. 2004.

Has
the well gone
practice:
Behavioral
40: 403-422.
Science,

OD

3: 17-49.

9901EED6143DF936A15756C0A9669C8B63.

Breakwell,

T., & Robinson,

Brown, G., Lawrence,

UK: Wheatsheaf.

nal

York: McGraw

fullpage.html?res=9405EEDBlE3CF935A15750C0A962958260.

F. 1989. Social

Academy

New

control of United
Bryant, A. 1994. Unions
edge closer to gaining
YorJr Times, http://query.nytimes.com/gst/
New
Airlines.

in
Argyris, C. 1996. Actionable
knowledge:
Design
causality
the service
of consequential
theory. Journal of Applied
Behavioral
32: 390-406.
Science,

organization.
20-39.

554-594.

(4th ed.):

psychology

London:

REFERENCES

Ashforth,

social

communication).

personal

51

Hill.

the basis

from readiness
directly to pro
The
consultant
de
integrative goals).
to work further with
this organization

model

O'Connor

C, Hampson,
nettle. Washington,
Press.

32: 230-243.

F., & Aall,

DC:

P. (Eds.). 2004. Grasping

the
States
Institute of Peace

United

F., & Aall,

Hampson,
conflicts. Washington,
stitute of Peace
Press.

Crocker,

C,

P.

intractable

Dalton,

M.

Review,

2003. Social
45(1):

identity

conflict.

7-8.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

(Eds.). 2005. Taming

DC: United States
In

Sloan

Management

52
H. S.

Desivilya,
role

of

search,

P., & Goertz,

Diehl,

coexistence

1998. Jewish-Arab

teams.

joint professional
35: 429-452.

constructs

and

Quarterly,

37:

Journal

in Israel:

The

of Peace

Re

empirical
147-171.

of Personality

rivalries:

Theoretical

International

patterns.

and

Social

75:

Psychology,

J.M.

1998. The

in organizations:
Identity
conversations:
245-256.

(Eds.),
through

dark

In D. Whetten

identification.

organizational

Island

K. 2003. The ASPIRe model:

S. Eggins, R., & Reynolds,
social and personal
to en
Actualizing
identity resources
hance
outcomes.
Journal of Occupational
organizational

Developing
theory
Thousand
CA:
Oaks,

Sage.
C. V.
J.M., & Harquail,
identification.
images and member
tive Science
39: 239-263.
Quarterly,

1994. Organi
Administra

J.E., Dukerich,

K.

1999. An expanded
model
of organizational
Elsbach,
in Organizational
tification. Research
Behavior,
M.

focus on finance,

2007. CEOs

iden
21: 163?

1989. A semiotic

analysis
boundaries
and

S., &

Hinkle,

R.

R.

Brown,

Fiol, C. M., & O'Connor,

in radical

E. J. 2002. When

E. J. 2003. Waking

the face of bandwagons.

28: 54-70.

Orga

cold

Academy

ality

in

1983. Third

party consultation
resolution.
Journal

conflict
intergroup
lution, 27: 301-334.

R., & Davidson,

Friedman,

perceptions

Gaertner,

1999. The

in Negotiation

S. L., Bachman,

of Conflict

black-white
and

of

in
gap
conse
7:

J.F., & Banker,

B. S.

Corporate

contexts:
Gaertner,
bias:

S.
The

Sheridan
Gaertner,

S.

265-282.

Ann Arbor:

Sheridan

L., Dovidio,

J. F., Nier,

J.

intergroup
Ann Arbor:

C. M.,

conflict:

173-212. New

York: Russell

Sage

Founda

Bulletin,

Psychology

26: 242-256.

&

identity: A Turk
39: 927
Studies,

Katz,

the bias
of Group

2(2): 33-50.

D. 1979. An ambivalence-amplification
the
I., & Glass,
toward the stigmatized.
InW. G. Austin
ory of behavior
& S. Worchel
of intergroup
(Eds.), The social psychology
relations:
55-70. Monterey,
CA: Brooks/Cole.

Kelman,

H.

proach
Middle

1998.

Interactive

to conflict

resolution

C.
East.

H. C.

1999. The

existential
Kelman,

Political

national

H. C.

resolution.

cultural divides:
The value
of
Banker, B. S. 1999. Across
a superordinate
identity. In D. A. Prentice & D. T. Miller
divides:
and overcoming
(Eds.), Cultural
Understanding
group
tion.

Social

estinian

J. A., Ward,

system
Press.

towards

Kelman,

Books.

L., & Dovidio,

J. F. 2000. Reducing
common
ingroup
identity model.
Books.

and

Tensions,

and
mergers
marriages:
stepfamily
InM. A. Hogg & D.
Identity, harmony, and commitment.
in organizational
identity processes
Terry (Eds.), Social
2001.

physician-health
Administration

A., & Ryen, A. H. 1972. Factors

influencing
one's own group. International
Journal

Kahn,

Reso

in Organizations,

B. A., Dovidio,

generation
Health

Chicago:

a viable model
L. E. 2006. Is pluralism
of
The benefits
and
limits of subgroup
diversity?
respect.
Processes
& Intergroup Relations,
9: 359-376.
Group

Re

a method

Its causes

of discrimination:
Research

quences.
203-228.

M.

as

and
identity theory: Construction
London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Huo, Y. J.,& Molina,

view,

R.

encounters:

and
Intergroup
comparisons
links and lacunae.
In D. Abrams
&

M., & Brown, A. 2002. Dress and

Humphreys,
ish case study. Journal of Management
952.

collide

up! Mindfulness
of Management

is not enough:
An
& R. Brown

1986. Contact

relations: A compar
Hornsey, M., & Hogg, M. 2000. Subgroup
ison of mutual
differentiation
and common
intergroup
of prejudice
reduction.
Person
ingroup
identity models

from community
13: 532-546.

Science,

Organization

Fiol, C. M., & O'Connor,

hot and

Press.

University

1990.

48-70.

2000. Next

partnerships.

role of lan

identities.

Lessons

processes:

change

development.

The

advances:

E.

C.

Holm,

language:
joint venturing. Admin
34: 277-303.

Quarterly,

NY: Syracuse

Syracuse,

M., & Brown,

critical

of corporate

on paradox:
C. M. 2002. Capitalizing
in transforming
guage
organizational
nization
13: 653-666.
Science,

Fisher,

(Eds.),

93-106.

identity: Some
M. Hogg
(Eds.), Social

Health

docs. Modern

"the

In M. Hewstone
intergroup
perspective.
in intergroup
and
conflict
(Eds.), Contact
1-44. Oxford:
Blackwell.

8-9.

37(1):

C. M.

Organizational
istrative Science
Fiol,

labor problem"
in the United
In L. Kriesberg,
T. Northrup,
&
Intractable
conflicts and their transfor

social

care,
Fiol,

S. Thorson

76: 83-113.

Psychology,

J. 1989. Managing
Haydu,
ca.
States
1897-1911.

Hewstone,

199.
Evans,

and Organizational

of

& P. Godfrey

zational

orches

Haslam,

109

side

Conflict

Press.

mation:

Dutton,

become
symbols:
identity within a symphony
11: 285-298.
Science,
cymbals

of environmental
In
Framing
disputes.
sense of
B. Gray, & M. Elliott
(Eds.), Making
environmental
conflicts:
11-34. London:

2003.

R. Lewicki,
intractable

R., & Parks,

J.,Kramer,

B.

Gray,

Studies

120.
Dukerich,

January

Glynn, M. 2000. When

over organizational

A. 1998. Intergroup bias:

Dovidio,
S., & Validzic,
J.,Gaertner,
and a common
Status differentiation
in-group
identity.
Journal

Review

tra. Organization

1993. Enduring

G.

of Management

Academy

conflicts.
2001. The

Science

interdependence
identities:
The
of Social

Journal

H. C.

2004.

Oxford:

Oxford

of Israeli
role

of

Issues,

190-198.
and

Pal

the other

in

55: 581-600.

identity in conflict
L. Jussim, & D. Wilder
(Eds.),
conflict, and conflict reduc

identity, intergroup
tion: 187-212. New York: Oxford

University

Press.

as
A
identity change:
In Y. Bar-Siman-Tov
perspective.
to reconciliation;
resolution
11-124.

Reconciliation

social-psychological
(Ed.), From conflict

ap
in the

role of national

In R. D. Ashmore,

Social

Kelman,

An

problem
solving:
and
its application
and Politics,
31:

University

Press.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2009
H. C.

Kelman,

2006.

identities: Three
Interests, relationships,
in negotiating
for individuals
and groups
environment.
of Psychology,
Annual
Review

their social
1-26.

S.

& Cohen,
An

conflict:
Austin

of international

1986. Resolution

In S. Worchel
approach.
of intergroup
relations

interactional

(Eds.), Psychology
Nelson-Hall.
Chicago:

Kilduff, M.

2006. Publishing
31: 252-255.
Review,

Kreiner,

(2nd

L.

B.

2004.

Evidence

of organizational
25:
Behavior,

Crocker,

ex

Journal

1-27.
of intrac
phases
& P. Aall
(Eds.),
con
of intractable

cases

United

States

Institute

of

to

L. 2003. Constructive
conflicts: From escalation
Kriesberg,
resolution.
New York: Rowman
and Littlefield.
matters:

E. J. 1989. Minding
Langer,
mindlessness-mindfulness.
22:

Psychology,

Lee, T., Mitchell,

T., Wise,

The

of
consequences
in Experimental

Advances
137-173.

L., & Fireman,

S. 1996. An unfolding
turnover.

of voluntary
employee
Journal, 39: 5-36.
Management

R. J.,Gray, B., & Elliott, M. 2003. Making

intractable
conflicts. Washington,
environmental
land Press.
A. R.

S.

addiction.

of
Is

DC:

IN:

Bloomington,

introduced

distrust
through carefully
Reducing
conciliation.
In S. Worchel
& W. Austin
(Eds.),
of

intergroup
Nelson-Hall.

F., & Ashforth,

relations

(2nd ed.):

305-322.

B. 1992. Alumni

and

their alma

mater:

of organizational
Behavior,

13:

103-123.
in conflict
emotions
2006. Engaging
24: 187-195.
Conflict Resolution
Quarterly,
M.

Maynard,

intervention.

to
M. W.
& Walsh,
2004. Union
asks
judge
trustee to run United Airlines.
New York Times,
=
://query. ny times. com/gst/fullpage.html?res
M.,

appoint
http

9900E0DD113EF931A2575BC0
A9629C8B63.

interac
and
J. L. 1978. Identities
in everyday
of associations
life
York: Free Press.

G. J.,& Simmons,
tions: An examination

McCall,

(revised

ed.). New

A., Klink, A., Mielke,

R., Wenzel,
M., & Blanz, M.
Mummendey,
1999. Social
structural
characteristics
of intergroup rela
tions and identity management
Results
from
strategies:
a

field study in East Germany.

cial Psychology,
29: 259-285.

M.
A., & Wenzel,
Mummendey,
in intergroup
and tolerance
group difference.
Personality
view,

3: 158-174.

M.

H.

2002.

trust and
Building
and administrators.

between

physicians
28: 48-52.
Executive,

The Physician

Press.

University

E. J.,& Bujak,
J.S. 2001. Trust, the strategic
to successfully
build physician-system

How

E.

O'Connor,

and Management

Leadership

C. M.,

J., Fiol,
Build

together:
The Physician

in Action,
B. W.,

M.

unity by strengthening
32: 16-21.
Executive,

24(3):

M.

European
1999. Social

relations:
and

discrimination

Reactions

Social

of So

Journal

to inter

Psychology

imper
part
9(5): 6-9.

Separately
groups.

2004. Collision

to conflict.

leads

identity
8-12.

2006.

physician

D., & Dalton,

Ohlott,
P., Chrobot-Mason,
courses: When
social
ship

& Guthrie,

Report

Leader

& Hetts,

Kramer,

derstanding
& O.

J. J. 1999. Implicit and explicit

per
a more complete
un
identity: Toward
of the social
self. In T. R. Tyler, R. M.
P. John (Eds.), The psychology
of the social

self:

London:

sonal

and

social

115-143.

J. 2006. What

Portilla,

Lawrence

exists

Erlbaum

Associates.

is possible:
from conflict
Stories
Conflict Resolution
Quarterly,

professionals.

Pratt, M.

G. 2000. The good,

the bad,
identification
among
Managing
Science
Administrative
Quarterly,

and

Re

the ambivalent:

distributors.
Amway
45: 456-493.

Pratt, M. G., & Corley, K. 2007. Managing

organiza
multiple
tional identities: On identity ambiguity,
identity conflict,
reactions.
and members'
In C. Bartel,
S. Blader,
&
zation:

Identity and the modern

Erlbaum
NJ: Lawrence

(Eds.),

99-118.

Mahwah,

organi
Associ

ates.
Pratt, M. G., & Doucet,

L. 2000. Ambivalent

nizational

test of the reformulated

model
partial
identification.
Journal of Organizational

Maiese,

J., & Annison,

A. Wrzesniewski

1986. GRIT:

Psychology
Chicago:

1947. Opiate

sense

Press.

Principia

E.

Syracuse

24: 241-248.
of

Academy

Lewicki,

Mael,

NY:

collaboration

resolution

model

Linskold,

of identity in personal
and
dynamic
In L. Kriesberg,
T. Northrup, & S. Thorson
conflicts and their transformation:
Intractable
55

(Eds.),

Pelham,

Press.

Lindesmith,

1989. The

conflict.

ative:

an

toward

identification.

and
dynamics,
F. Hampson,

the nettle: Analyzing

Grasping
flict: 65-97. Washington,
DC:

Social

T.

Northrup,
social

nerships.

1986. Nature,
In C.

tability.

Peace

53

O'Connor,

ofManagement

theory. Academy

& Ashforth,

G.,

model
panded
of Organizational
Kriesberg,

O'Connor

O'Connor,
&

323-342.

ed.):

and

82. Syracuse,

H. C,

Kelman,
W.

Pratt

issues

central
57:

Fiol

In S. Fineman
relationships.
vol. 2: 204-226. London:
organizations,

Pratt, M. G., & Foreman,

2000. Classifying
managerial
identities.
Acad
organizational

emy Management
Pratt, M. G.,

& Rafaeli,

A.

18-42.
as

dress

a
of

Academy

40: 862-898.

Journal,

Management

25:

1997. Organizational
social
identities.

of multi-layered

symbol

Sage.

P. O.

to multiple
Review,

responses

in orga
feelings
in
(Ed.), Emotions

& Olczak,

P. 1995. Beyond
to
hope: Approaches
intractable
In B. Bunker &
conflicts.
seemingly
and justice:
59-92.
(Eds.), Conflict
cooperation,
Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Pruitt, D.,

solving
J.Rubin
San

L. L., & Wondolleck,

Putnam,

nitions,

dimensions,

B. Gray, & M.
environmental

Elliott

J.M.

and

2003.

distinctions.

Defi
Intractability:
In R. J. Lewicki,
sense of intractable

(Eds.), Making
35-62. Washington,

conflicts:

DC:

Island

Press.
S., & Scheff, S.
Retzinger,
narratives:
Resolving
18: 71-85.
Quarterly,
Roccas,

S., & Brewer,

Personality

and

M.
Social

2000.

Emotion,

intractable

B. 2002. Social
Psychology

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

alienation,

conflict.

and

Mediation

identity complexity.
6: 88-106.
Review,

54
J. 1997. Resolving
and
tions, organizations,

Rothman,

Academy

in na

conflict

identity-based
communities.

of Management

research
and

N. N., & Bar-Tal,

intractable
ian case.

D.

1998. Psychological
dynamics
conflicts: The Israeli-Palestin

ethnonational
American

of

A.

2006.

Identity and
York: Norton.

New
Seull,

violence:

The

illusion

identity, and
36: 553-569.

B. J.,Hood, W. R., & Sherif,

Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J.,White,
1961. Intergroup
C. W.
conflict and cooperation:
The rob
ber's cave experiment.
Norman: University
of Oklahoma
Book

Exchange.
S. 2006. Frame
D., Elliott, M., & Kaufman,
the management
of intractable
conflicts.

Shmueli,
and

Resolution

J., Feshbach,
interface between
or

nic

pluralism
61:
Quarterly,

S., Levin,
ethnic and
ethnic

S., & Pratto,

Public

dominance?

B.

Spangler,

1993. Transformative

Stephan, W. G., & Stephan,

in intergroup relations.
in contact:
Orlando,

C. W.

W. G.

Weick,

Tajfel,

yet so far away,

group
social

conflict.

New

zational

social

of intergroup

Worchel,

integrative
theory of inter
G. Austin & S. Worchel
(Eds.), The
33-47.

1-15.

distrust in intrac
E., & Lewicki, R. 2006. Managing
table conflicts. Conflict Resolution
24: 219-228.
Quarterly,

Tomlinson,

Behavior,

21: 81-123.

1998. The

complexity
of research.
Research

S., Andreoli,

of diversity:
in Organi
York

Yan,

V. A., &

R. 1977. Intergroup
Folger,
The effect of pre
intergroup attraction:
and outcome
of combined
effort. Jour

of Experimental

Social

Psychology,

13: 131-140.

B. 1994. Bargaining
A., & Gray,
power, management
and performance
in United
States-China
joint
A comparative
case
ventures:
of Man
study. Academy
control,

agement
Yin,

Journal,

R. 2003. Case
CA:

37: 1478-1517.

study

research

(3rd ed.).

Thousand

Oaks,

Sage.

I.W. 2005. Analyzing

In C. Crocker,
intractability.
F. Hampson,
& P. Aall
con
intractable
(Eds.), Taming
flicts: 47-64. Washington,
DC: United
States
Institute of
Peace
Press.

Zartman,

Zartman,
ation.

I.W.,

& Rubin,

Ann Arbor:

J. Z. (Eds.).

University

2000. Power

of Michigan

Fiol (marlena.fiol@cudenver.edu)
is a professor
of strategic management
at the University
of Colorado
Denver.
She received
her Ph.D. in strategic management
from the University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Her research
interests
include
and organizational
managerial
cognition,
organizational
learning, and organization
C. Marlene

al

1999. Organizing
mindfulness.

21: 77-140.

Behavior,

and
cooperation
vious
interaction
nal

differences matter: A new

D., & Ely, R. 1996. Making
formanaging
Business
Re
paradigm
diversity. Harvard
74(5):

D.

of collective

Processes
reliability:
in Organizational

S. 1986. The role of cooperation

in reducing
inter
& W. Austin
group conflict. In S. Worchel
(Eds.), Psychol
relations
(2nd ed.): 288-304. Chicago:
ogy of intergroup
Nelson-Hall.

www.cfcj

Thomas,

view,

K. M., & Obstfeld,

Worchel,

groups: Studies
relations.
New

relations:

the unex

2001. Managing

Jossey-Bass.

9E07E2D7163DF936A2575BC0A9649C8B63.

1979. An

of intergroup
psychology
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Monterey,

to emo
companions
Edward
Elgar.

E. 2002. Bankruptcy
hint at United Airlines.
New
Wong,
Times,
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html9res=

York: Ginn.

between

K. M.

C.
K., & O'Reilly,
A review of forty years

Press.
J.C.
In W.

Francisco:

Research

role of ignorance
& M. B. Brewer
(Eds.),

of desegregation:
psychology
FL: Academic
Press.

Tajfel, H. 1978. Differentiation

in the social
psychology
H., & Turner,

Sutcliffe,

San

for high

change
of Social
and

http:llwww.

Boston:

589-604.

K. E., &

K. E., Sutcliffe,

Weick,

1984. The

In N. Miller

1906. Folkways.

York: Academic

(Eds.), Research

1987. Psychology
of the self in social
conflict. In
& J.Burton (Eds.), International
conflict resolution:
56-62. Sussex, UK: Wheatsheaf.
Theory and practice:

social

mediation.

view of ambiv
identity-based
in organizations.
In N. Ashka

B.
Wedge,
E. Azar

fcjc.org/full-text/2001_dra/kim_stock.html.
Sumner,

2008. An

itsmanagement

and

nasy & C. L. Cooper

tion in organizations:

The

... so close,

Stock, K. 2001. Peace

alence

Opinion

beyondintractability.org/essay/transformative_mediation/?
nid=1293.

Groups
229-255.

L., & Pratt, M. G.

Wang,

Eth

19: 201-213.

Psychology,

Press.

Psychology

and professional
commit
J.E. 1995. Organizational
in professional
and
nonprofessional
organiza
tions. Administrative
40: 228-255.
Science
Quarterly,

Williams,

1980. Intergroup
relations
and
a nursing
context. British Journal

Clinical

1997. The

103-133.

S.

Skevington,
within

F.

attachment:

Philadelphia:

ment

pected.

national

249-264.

Wallace,

24: 207-218.

Quarterly,

Sidanius,

changes
Conflict

Work

economy.

global

32: 383-399.

Occupations,

contexts:

of destiny.

J. 1999. "Ours is the way of God": Religion,

intergroup conflict. Journal of Peace Research,

for a contested

agenda

A new

to revitalization:

transformation

E. 2001. Organiza
D., & Van Leeuwen,
Knippenberg,
tional identity after a merger:
of continuity as the
Sense
identification.
In M. A. Hogg & D. J.
key to postmerger
in organizational
Terry (Eds.), Social
identity processes

S. T.

1995. Perceptions
of power,
Rouhana,
in asymmetric
threat, and conflict
intensity
intergroup
conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution,
39: 49-81.
Sen,

Van

53: 761-770.

Psychologist,

N. N., & Fiske,

January

L. 2005. From

Turner,

Francisco:

San

Jossey-Bass.
Rouhana,

Review

identity.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and

Press.

negoti

2009

Fiol,
Michael

G.

organizational
of Michigan.

Pratt, and

O'Connor

55

is a Winston
Fellow
and professor
of
(Michael.Pratt.l@bc.edu)
at Boston College.
He earned
his Ph.D.
studies
from the University
interests
His current research
include
individual
identity plurality,

Pratt

organizational

relationships,

meaning

of work,

and

intuition.

is a professor
of management
(edward.oconnor@cudenver.edu)
J.O'Connor
at the University
of Colorado
Denver. He received
health administration
his Ph.D.
in industrial/organizational
from the University
of Akron. His research
psychology

Edward
and

interests
tional

include

physician-administration

collaboration,

leadership,

and

organiza

cognition.

This content downloaded from 144.82.108.120 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:39:46 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions