See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235250630

Integrating Taoist Yin-Yang thinking

with Western nomology: A moderating
model of trust in conflict management

Article in Chinese Management Studies · April 2011

DOI: 10.1108/17506141111118453

CITATIONS READS

19 125

3 authors, including:

Rong Du C. MacSwiney Brugha

Xi'an Electronic Science and Techno… University College Dublin
34 PUBLICATIONS 177 CITATIONS 60 PUBLICATIONS 470 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Your interest in CSR is close to some of my interests View project

All content following this page was uploaded by C. MacSwiney Brugha on 06 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1750-614X.htm

Trust in conflict
Integrating Taoist Yin-Yang management
thinking with Western nomology
A moderating model of trust in conflict
management 55
Rong Du and Shizhong Ai
School of Economics and Management, Xidian University, Xi’an, China, and
Cathal M. Brugha
Quinn School of Business, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to relate Taoist Yin-Yang thinking to Western nomology in terms of trust
and trust building, seeking to explore the question of how trust impacts on conflict management.
Design/methodology/approach – A moderating model of trust in conflict management is proposed.
Investigations and observations using primary and secondary data are described. Three cases are
presented to explain the moderating effects of adjusting activities and trust on conflict and negotiation.
Findings – The proposed model was supported. The following findings have been obtained: keeping a
balance between adjusting others and adjusting self is a key to resolving conflict; creating and retaining
harmony is a bridge that leads both sides in conflict and negotiation to adjust themselves; taking indirect
actions through relationships instead of by direct actions through power is a good way to trigger a state
of harmony; and trust is shown to be the original driver and source that contribute to adapting actions,
harmony and eventually to a win-win negotiation outcome.
Research limitations/implications – The investigations were limited in time and scope and
consequently not conclusive.
Practical implications – This research may provide practical implictions for people and
organizations interested in conflict resolution who wish to: take a position that values trust; take
indirect actions through relationship instead of direct actions through power; create and retain harmony
between both sides in conflict and negotiation; and keep a balance between adjusting others and
adjusting self, so to achieve win-win negotiation outcomes.
Originality/value – This research may enhance the understanding of Taoist Yin-Yang thinking by
linking it with the Western nomology.
Keywords Taoism, Thinking styles, Trust, Negotiating, Conflict management
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
This paper reflects on the roles of trust in conflict management. In this research, trust
refers to “reliance on the integrity, ability, or character of a person or thing” and “reliance
on something in the future”. Basically, trust means “ability, benevolence, and integrity”
of the person to be trusted and the propensity to trust (Mayer et al., 1995). This research
Chinese Management Studies
This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China through Grant Vol. 5 No. 1, 2011
70871096 and the Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University in China through pp. 55-67
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Grant NCET-08-0812. It is also supported by the China Scholarship Council and University 1750-614X
College Dublin, Ireland. DOI 10.1108/17506141111118453
CMS tries to gain insight into the ways trust impacts on negotiations, not only negotiation
5,1 tactics and strategies but also the outcomes of negotiations.
For many years, conflict management scholars have used game theory to research into
the issues in negotiations. In addition, a variety of different conceptualizations and theories
have been developed and used. Unfortunately, there has been too much focus on traditional
bargaining in negotiations and less on the area of collaboration in negotiations
56 (Roose, 2006). Moreover, there is comparatively little research exploring the issues of trust
in the context of conflict management. This is somewhat surprising since trust could
provide a bridge to alleviate the disputes between two sides, where both sides wish to
emphasise collaboration and conflict resolution. Trust may move both sides away from
conflict towards confrontation, and thereby to cooperation or collaboration. Consequently,
we intend to explore the question of how trust impacts on conflict managements.
This paper proposes a moderating model of trust in conflict management within
a Western nomological framework for understanding conflict management. It makes
an analysis of the conflict decision making process based on a succession of dichotomies,
and elucidates some of the ideas in terms of Taoist Yin-Yang thinking to reveal a subtle
way that trust appears to impact on conflict and negotiations. Later, after the model,
some cases are presented to illustrate how trust changes conflict decision-making
and then impacts on conflict and negotiations. Implications for management are
then addressed. Theoretically, this research seeks to enhance the understanding of
Taoist Yin-Yang thinking by linking it with the Western nomology, exploring the ways
that trust impacts on conflict and negotiation.

2. Relating Western nomology to Taoist Yin-Yang thinking in conflict

management
To explore how trust impacts on conflict and negotiations, we relate Western nomology
to Taoist Yin-Yang thinking for understanding conflict management. Nomology is a
mapping process. Nomology (Brugha, 1998a, b, c) suggests that there are limited kinds of
decision structure, and that all decision practice should fit into these structures. It indicates
that decision structures are either subjective: committing self and convincing others,
which follow a dialectical process (as in thesis, antithesis and synthesis), or objective:
adjusting self and adjusting others, which are based on balances between opposites.
All four of these derive from a fundamental adjusting structure, which is based on
two balances between opposites: planning versus putting, and place versus people.
These form four general activities: proposition (planning in place), perception (planning
with people), pull (putting in place), and push (putting in place). These are described as
objective and are differentiated from subjective activities, where the decision maker does
not feel the pull of any outside authority influencing the decision, thus reducing the
general activities to three.
The balance idea central to the above is mirrored in Taoist Yin-Yang thinking.
Nomology’s adjusting structure applies in many fields. Nomology shows how
all adjusting constructs have meanings in terms of decision making. In this article, we
explore adjusting others in the context of East-West understanding. One version in the
West relates to strategy, which has phases: “direction” (proposition), “mission”
(perception), “vision” (pull), and “integration” (push).
Another, in the context of conflict management, brings out the dilemmas that
people have when making decisions. Conflict processes also have four phases:
“collaboration”, “cooperation”,“confrontation”, and “conflict” (Brugha, 2006). From the Trust in conflict
perspective of Nomology, the division on the basis of “collaboration”/“cooperation” and management
“confrontation”/“conflict” corresponds to a change from agreeing to disagreeing. The
adjustment that takes place is to the “relationships” between the two sides as they move
into disagreement, which may end in conflict. Conflict is possible but not certain.
Collaboration is about two sides working together, with jointly held interests. If one
controls the other, the relationship need not always be a happy one to constitute 57
a collaboration. However, where there are two very distinct cultures held by two sides,
as in conflict management, genuine collaboration should be about neither dominating
the other, but based on trust that might lead to a constructive resolution. The aim should
be to reach a stage of integration.
The dilemmas for the general adjusting activities of collaboration, cooperation,
confrontation, and conflict correspond to the pragmatic question whether to continue
with an activity or move onto the next one in the sequence. The difference between
conflict and confrontation is between the aggressive use of direct action that tries to get
one’s way by means of power, and the more defensive use of indirect action that tries to
mediate relationships through people. In conflict mangement and negotiation, prior
to getting into conflict it is better to try confrontation that seeks to “persuade” the people
on the other side to relent. Before confrontation, the two sides should go through a phase
of cooperation. With cooperation, there is still the hope that there is scope for
more agreement than disagreement between both sides as long as they have trust in the
perceptions of both sides. Collaboration assumes that both sides are, or can be united,
in some general way. This does not eliminate suspicion entirely. However, the
assumption of collaboration puts pressure on both sides to act as if they were integrated.
If either side were to be found to be dishonest with the other, this could weaken the
relationship and move it from being a collaboration into cooperation.
Traditional adjusting in conflict management and negotiations puts more emphasis
on aggressive bargaining. One first assumes that collaboration is possible, turning
to cooperation only when there are difficulties with the relationship. If that fails, one uses
confrontation. One resorts to conflict only when all else fails. The adjuster controls the
adjusting process, and only makes the pragmatic decision to move to the next activity
when prevented from making further progress.
Conflict resolution follows an adapting process in which both sides puts more
emphases on mutually adjusting themselves together in order to keep in harmony. This
starts when both sides show their trust, agreeing that it is likely to be a win-win game for
both to turn away from conflict, and confront one another. The aim is to move from
confrontation into cooperation, and from cooperation into collaboration through the
impacts of increasing acts of trust.
Countries where Taoist Yin-Yang thinking is widely accepted, e.g. Eastern Asian
countries such as China, Japan, and Korea, are rich in ideas about conflict management.
It should be possible to link the above nomological framework with conflict
management ideas that derive from Taoist Yin-Yang thinking.
Taoist Yin-Yang thinking involves a basic understanding that Yin and Yang are two
patterns (two interactive forces), which coexist and interact with one another (Chen et al.,
2009). Many ideas on conflict management rely on this fundamental understanding.
Leung, et al. (2002) poses four constructs: “aligning”, “balancing”, “smoothing”
and “disintegrating”. “Aligning” matches collaborating, in that the major task of
CMS collaborators is to try and align the activities of different groups. “Balancing” matches
5,1 cooperating, because it emphasises the importance of the relationship, ensuring that
there is a balance in the benefits and costs received by both sides. “Smoothing” matches
confronting, in the sense of resolving issues that offend harmony. “Disintegrating”
matches conflict in the sense that it leads to a breakdown in civil behaviour with one
another. Notice the link with “integration” above, pointing to conflict being about an
58 “integration/disintegration” dilemma.
Onishi and Bliss (2006) found some similarities in ways to manage conflict amongst
Asian countries including Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand, and Vietnam. “Integrating” was
found to be the most preferred style for dealing with conflict, and showed the least
variation, among the groups. Wang et al. (2007) also found that Chinese top managers
are inclined to use integration to handle conflict.
Chen and Starosta (1997-1998) suggested harmony, guanxi (inter-relation), mientze
(face), and power should form a framework for the model of conflict resolution and
management. Hwang (1997-1998) relates mientze (face) to an “individual’s awareness
about a public image formed in other’s minds”. Chen and Starosta (1997-1998) suggest
that the “Chinese endeavour to establish guanxi and give face to others to reach a state of
harmony in social interaction in order to avoid confrontation and conflict”. A concern
about “losing face” can lead to an avoidance of confrontation.
Examining the above parallel of conflict management ideas in nomology with those in
Taoist Yin-Yang thinking, we can see that the main conflict management idea in
Taoist Yin-Yang thinking puts emphasis on harmony. The ideas of “treasuring harmony”,
“harmony leads to fortunes”, “take jade and silk instead of swords and shields”
(corresponding to the Western “beat your swords into plowshares”: (Joel 3:11) and
“changing enemies into friends” in traditional Taoist doctrine are good examples. However,
how does trust impact on the state of harmony? How does harmony impact on the evolution
of conflicts and negotiations? These questions will be explored in the next section.

3. Moderating model of trust in conflict management

Trust plays important roles in conflict management. In Taoist Yin-Yang thinking, the
saying of “stone can be moved to be open by trust” shows the positive impact of trust.
Some Western research has also shown a similar impact. For examples, Parayitam and
Dooley (2007) found that cognition-based trust is the key to fortifying the benefits
of cognitive conflict while affect-based trust is the panacea for the ills of cognitive
conflict. Tasoluk et al. (2006) suggested mechanisms for resolving conflict through
increased communication, greater trust in capabilities, and greater collaboration in
meeting common challenges, through which disruptive conflict can be transformed into
functional conflict and collaboration. However, the way that trust impacts on conflict
and negotiations has not been well understood.
To explore this underdeveloped area, we propose a moderating model of trust in
conflict management, on the basis of which adjustment activities and conflict resolutions
can be explained. As shown in Figure 1, trust may lead to an adapting action in
negotiations that is taken by using “relationship through people”, i.e. guanxi. This may
result in harmony, which may help both sides to mutually adapt to one another, which in
turn may positively contribute to conflict resolution, i.e. moving both sides in negotiation
away from conflict, toward confrontation, then away from confrontation toward
cooperation, and finally one may reach collaboration. This process is demonstrated by
 Distrust Distrust Distrust Trust in conflict
management
Adjusting action Adjusting action Adjusting action

Increasing disharmony Choosing disharmony Reducing harmony

59
Conflict Confrontation Cooperation Collaboration

Reducing disharmony Choosing harmony Increasing harmony

Adapting action Adapting action Adapting action

Figure 1.
Moderating model of trust
Trust Trust Trust in conflict management

the bold arrowed lines in Figure 1. On the contrary, distrust may lead to adjusting action in
negotiations that is taken by using power, seniority, and rank. Then, it may result in
disharmony, which may make both sides resort to control over the other and try to adjust
others (e.g. forcing them to make concessions), which in turn may negatively contribute to
conflict resolution, i.e. moving both sides in negotiation away from collaboration toward
cooperation and confrontation, and finally causing conflict. This process is illustrated by
the broken-arrowed lines.
In the evolution of conflict toward confrontation, trust appears to be essential
to reducing disharmony, where both sides do not see the opposite side as the enemy and
they feel that they can coexist. In the evolution of confrontation toward cooperation,
trust seems to be important to harmony in the context of mutuality, which can
be described as “choosing harmony”. Here, both sides see the other side as potential
co-workers, and they realize that they are mutually involved with one another. In the
evolution of cooperation toward collaboration, trust is fundamental to “increasing
harmony”, i.e. both sides see the other side as friend and collaborator and they know that
they have interests and benefits in common.
In the reverse evolution of negotiation, from collaboration through cooperation to
confrontation, and finally to conflict, distrust works in a similar way. In a situation of
collaboration, distrust in a negotiation is likely to gradually undermine harmony, and
affect the collaboration. In a situation where cooperation exists in a negotiation, distrust
may stimulate disharmony, and make both sides move from cooperation to
confrontation. And in a confrontation, distrust can increase disharmony, which in
turn may move both sides from confrontation into conflict.
In the moderating model of trust in conflict management, the dilemmas for the
general adjusting activities of collaboration, cooperation, confrontation, and conflict still
exist. The dilemmas correspond to the question whether to continue with an activity or
move onto the next one in the sequence. The answer to this question depends on whether
there is a balance between adjusting others and adjusting self.
Trust is a deep inter-personal attribute that cannot be held for long hypocritically. It is
not viable in the long term to present a view in one’s negotiations with others (adjusting
CMS others) that is dishonestly at variance with one’s personally held positions (adjusting
5,1 self). In particular, adapting oneself requires a continual reassessment of one’s true
intentions and one’s relationship with the other.

4. Methodology and data

Trust research is becoming increasingly more important than before in the area
60 of conflict management. However, despite its increasing importance, few researchers
rely on empirical research to interpret their observations. In this study, we use a
phenomenology approach and qualitative method to conduct some investigations,
aiming to observe and interpret how trust impacts on conflict management in the
moderating model of trust, which relates Western nomology to Taoist Yin-Yang
thinking for understanding conflict management.
In our study, we conducted a survey of relevant literature, investigated some historical
records and stories, and participated in some tour groups to make observations.
A television programme on the Great Wall of China stimulated the interest to
investigate the conflict situations that existed in Chinese history between the Chinese
majority and its Northern minorities. This led to research into the conflict in the
Chinese Han Dynasty between the Han Empire and the Xiongnu nomads. We then
applied the model to the case of conflict resolution in the Chinese Han Dynasty, using
secondary data obtained some from Chinese historical records and stories.
In July 2007, two of our researchers participated in three tour groups run by a German
tourist corporation. They observed and recorded every event that took place in their
groups during their tours in Europe. A range of investigation methods were used during
their involvement with the tour groups. In addition to a number of informal chats on
tour buses, our researchers spent time talking with their guides and the other tourists
whenever they had any chance, during which they observed their activities,
communicated with them, and tried to develop a good understanding of them. When
conflicts happened or negotiations were in process, they made many efforts to talk to their
guides and the associated people in the groups, trying to know more details about what
happened during the conflicts and negotiations. This became the primary data for this
study. Then, two cases of negotiation and conflict in tour groups were formed and studied.
In the above ways, we obtained the cases that reflect moderating effects of trust on
conflict management, and made analyses of them by relating them to our moderating
model of trust, trying to reveal the moderating effects of trust on the process of conflict
management. From those case studies, one could well understand the moderating model
of trust in conflict management. We acknowledge that, owing to the limited quality of
the Chinese historical documents that we accessed and the limited quality of our
relationship with respondents, there might be a possibility that some personal biases
and reflections may occur in this research. However, the main framework and theoretical
ideas can be underpinned by the process analysis of these cases. In the two cases of the
tour groups, we do not use the real names of the company and the people involved.

5. Case studies
5.1 Case of conflict resolution in the Chinese Han Dynasty
In the Han Dynasty (206 BC-AD 220) in Chinese history, a strong nationality near the
Northern border of Han, the Xiongnu, had been in opposition to the Han Empire for a
very long time. The Xiongnu nomads always invaded the lands of Han’s citizens in the
north of the Han Empire. Wudi (Liu Che, r. 140-87 BC), a Han Emperor, had ordered Trust in conflict
General Qing Wei and General Qubing Huo to lead military troops to fight against the management
Xiongnu on three occasions. However, the disputes in the border areas did not diminish.
Owing to the continuous war, the Han Empire’s power decreased gradually, and the
Xiongnu broke into a few groups. Under these circumstances, a chieftain of one of the
Xiongnu’s groups, Huhanxie abandoned his weapons, i.e. taking an adapting action.
He made a proposal to the Han Emperor, suggesting that the two sides should stop the 61
war. To show his trust, in the year of 51 BC, Huhanxie went to the Han Empire’s capital,
Changan (Xian today), to visit Xuandi, the Han Emperor. In return, Xuandi gave
Huhanxie a warm welcome. In reciprocation, to show his trust, Xuandi agreed that
Huhanxie and his soldiers could stay in Guanglu, a place near the northern border of
the Han Empire. Thereby, disharmony was reduced, which helped the Han Empire and
the Xiongnu nomads move out of conflict into confrontation.
Later Huhanxie took more adapting actions, trying to choose harmony through
personal interaction. In the year of 49 BC, Huhanxie went to Changan again to visit the
Han Empire’s new Empire, Yuandi, and was made welcome again. The established
harmony was retained for years. In 33 BC, he went to Changan the third time. To express
his trust, Huhanxie told the Han Emperor that he would like to be Han Empire’s
son-in-law. In return, Yuandi ordered him to choose a wonderful woman from the many
beautiful girls in his palace. Zhaojun Wang, a palace maiden, was married to Huhanxie.
As a result of choosing harmony, this marriage made both sides move away from
confrontation toward cooperation.
With trust, Huhanxie loved Zhaojun Wang, and regarded her as his queen, giving her
a special title. As Xiongnu’s queen, Zhaojun Wang gave birth to a son and two
daughters. Her children and grandchildren contributed a lot to the peace between the
Han Empire and the Xiongnu. On the Han Empire’s side, Zhaojun Wang’s relatives were
sent by the Han Emperor to visit Xiongnu. These actions led both sides to be close to one
another and increased harmony. Finally, 60 years later, there was a final end to the war
between them. Indeed, the Han Empire and the Xiongnu then moved toward
collaboration.

5.2 Case of a successful negotiation in a tour group

In the Pigeon Tourist Corporation, tour guides are encouraged by the boss to add a few
locations for their tourists to visit as long as the tourists agree to do so. These locations
are usually not listed in the tour schedule and in the price lists that are given to tourists.
Of course, the tourists are charged additional fees. Conflicts and negotiations often occur
when a guide tries to do so.
As a part time guide, Howard guided a group of tourists to view some famous places
in Austria, Italy, and Germany. When he met his group, he introduced himself, a Chinese
postgraduate student in a German university. Then he asked all the tourists in his group
to introduce themselves, to help them get to know one another. Next, he announced his
“policy” for the group: that anyone who is late for any reason at any time should have to
give a performance as an apology. He explained that the performance can be any form of
show, such as singing, telling jokes, etc. In the following days, according to this policy
several tourists were “punished” by Howard. On the other hand, he made every effort to
help everyone in the group. He told jokes to make the group laugh. In summary, while he
used his policy to adjust the others, i.e. his tourists, and he did everything he could
CMS to show his trust, i.e. he adjusted himself. As a result, the group behaved like a big family
5,1 in harmony.
One afternoon in Italy, Howard proposed that the group could go to see two more
wonderful places if they paid an additional e30 each. He explained that the two locations,
Verona City and Lake Garda, are very famous and beautiful, the weather is lovely, and
the time is just right. He said he hoped all his tourists would consider his proposal and
62 make a decision as a group. If the decision was to go, the whole group should go. No
exception would be permitted.
A few younger tourists wanted to go. Some others did not. Howard’s opinion was to
go, because he would like to “get more money” for his additional services. So a conflict
between Howard and his tourists emerged. Some tourists intended to debate with
Howard.
In this situation, Howard did not use his authority and power as the guide to influence
the group to adjust. Rather, he took some adapting actions to move the process out of
conflict. First, he calmed himself down, and then the others by smiling at those
emotionally impulsive tourists. Then, he suggested that they should negotiate this issue
later after the group settled down in their booked hotel. He said the most important thing
at the moment was to have a short rest and then dinner.
After that he initiated a confrontation process of “smoothing” the group (see above).
He began by helping an elderly couple to carry their heavy luggage. In this way, Howard
showed good will and “shared ownership” with the group’s concerns, and reduced the
disharmony in the group, trying to get the tourists who opposed his idea to move away
from conflict to confrontation.
Later Howard took more adapting actions, trying to increase harmony through
personal interaction. After dinner, to show his trust, Howard went to the rooms of his
tourists to confirm that everyone was happy with the hotel. Moreover, he talked to his
tourists personally, one-to-one. He told those who did not want to go to the two places,
some former tourists’ good evaluations on the two locations. He also asked some senior
people for support. In return, he promised to offer them a discount, adapting himself
to others, i.e. to the tourists. Among the tourists who opposed Howard’s proposal, some
were moved by Howard and changed their minds (moving from confrontation to
cooperation). They agreed to help him to persuade the other opponents.
The next day, before the group made a decision, Howard said he understood that
some of his tourists were too tired yesterday afternoon to be clear thinking, but after a
wonderful meal and a nice night they had changed their minds. In this way,
he encouraged harmony between the two sides within the group. To express his trust,
Howard said he would not charge any money if the group were not happy with the two
places. Then, he said to the group: “please put your hands up if you do not want to go to
the two places.” Some people looked around but finally nobody put their hands up.
“Then we’ll go together. You’ve made a correct decision and you’ll enjoy the beautiful
sceneries there.” As a result of choosing harmony, this form of group decision made the
tourists who were against Howard move away from confrontation toward cooperation.
On the way to the two places, with honesty in his heart, Howard told wonderful
histories and beautiful stories about the places. To show his trust, he lent money to pay
for tolls. In the two locations, to show his honesty, Howard helped his tourists to take
photos, and organized the whole group together to take a photo of the group so that they
would have good memories of the visit. Through these actions, Howard got to be close
to his tourists and helped to increase harmony. Finally, three days later, there was no Trust in conflict
conflict between Howard and his tourists. Indeed, they had moved toward collaboration. management
After the tour, every member of the group got a greeting e-mail and a gift of an attached
photo of the group from Howard.

5.3 Case of a conflict between a tour guide and his tourists

As a senior guide, Simon has excellent knowledge about his specialism. He is very good 63
at talking about European history. He has a master’s degree from a German university.
He has a very good memory. He can remember exact dates and names, which contributes
a lot to the memorable talks that he gives to his tourists. He is also very good at
interacting with hotels, restaurants, and ticket offices. He also has a warm heart, always
prepared to provide little things such as electric plug adaptors for the tourists who need
them in their rooms during the tours. But he tends to have a bad temper. He easily
becomes angry and tends to argue with people. Moreover, he is not good at expressing
his feelings.
On one occasion, Simon guided a group of Chinese tourists to visit lots of places in
Northern Europe. When he met his group, he emphasised that everyone should obey
some rules, including “punctuality”. In summary, he seemed to wish to impose his
authority and power in the group in some way, to want a control over the group. As a
result, some of his tourists tend to call him “boss” and “commander”.
One morning in Stockholm, before his tourists entered a museum, Simon ordered
that all the tourists in his group should return to the bus before 10.00 a.m. At 10.00 a.m.,
a man still had not returned. Simon complained and warned that next time he would
not wait 1 minute because he had booked a City Hall visit, which should happen at
1.00 p.m., just after a Royal Performance. This created conflict. The wife of the
“missing” man became anxious. The man returned five minutes later. His wife scolded
him for lateness. He was not happy with that.
Before the Royal Performance, Simon ordered that all the tourists should come back
to the tour bus before 12.30 p.m. He said that the performance usually ended at 12.20 p.m.
He warned again that he would not wait for anybody who was late for any reason.
For some reason, the performance did not end at 12.20 p.m. It was still going on at
12.30 p.m. Consequently, four tourists did not return in time. The same poor man was
among them. Simon told the driver to leave and go to the City Hall. The man’s wife was
very anxious and wanted Simon to wait for the four tourists. Simon was angry. He cried
that it was impossible to waste the whole group’s time. He did not explain how to deal
with the four tourists, to deal with the issue as a confrontation. Simon used his position to
“push” the driver to leave without the four in the group. This was an act of conflict with
the group and its wishes. He broke the integrity of the group and his “shared ownership”
with the group, who clearly did not want to see their friends left behind. He overused his
authority and power as the guide of the group, thereby reducing the harmony in the
group. The man’s wife quarrelled with Simon. In this condition, Simon still insisted that
the group should go on. And it did. Since then, the relationship between Simon and his
two tourists, the man and his wife, worsened.
From Simon’s later behaviour (going back to collect the four tourists), one could see
that Simon had planned to return to pick up the four tourists after the major part of the
group entered the City Hall. But he had not informed anyone of this, which might have
“smoothed” their upset. Instead, he quarrelled with the woman as if he were about to
CMS abandon those four tourists. In this way, Simon chose disharmony. The disharmony
5,1 caused the woman to move away from cooperation to confrontation.
Even though the four tourists were later picked up and brought back to the group,
they were dissatisfied because they did not have enough time to visit the City Hall. They
strongly asked Simon for compensation. Simon was annoyed. In the following days,
Simon continued his conflict with the four tourists by ignoring them, especially the man
64 and his wife. On the other hand, he made more efforts to tell the histories and stories of
the places where the group visited. But he did not take any adapting actions, e.g. personal
interaction or individual chat with the couple, to alleviate the confrontation between him
and the couple so as to reduce the disharmony in the group.
On the last day of the tour, the man and his wife were supposed to catch a train at
7.00 p.m. in the railway station in Hamburg. In the early morning, they asked Simon to let
them off the tour bus at the railway station at 6.00 p.m. Simon said he would do that if
possible. He did not give any more explanation even though he knew the traffic situation
might be very uncertain in those rush hours. At 4.30 p.m., before going to the last
scheduled sight-seeing location, Simon told the group that the railway station was just
over there, and that the people who wished to take the train could go then. Then, he
guided the group on the tour bus to leave for the Harbour of Hamburg. On the way there,
a heavy traffic jam occurred. The tour bus moved very slowly. At about 5.20 p.m., the
group was still on the way to the Harbour. The man began to worry. He asked Simon
whether his wife and he would be able to catch their train.
Without any comfort to the poor man, which might have helped to reduce the
disharmony, Simon was angry and accused the man of not leaving at 4.30 p.m.
Moreover, he said that he could not change his schedule and drive the tour bus to the
railway station just for the two people. He ordered the man and his wife to get off the bus
immediately and to go to the railway station by taxi. Obviously, Simon focused on
adjusting the other people when he was faced with a dilemma, rather than on adapting
others (such as rerouting the tour bus or the schedule to convenience the couple) or on
adapting himself (such as personally doing something to help the couple). No matter
what Simon really wished to express, these adjusting actions that Simon took broke
trust with the couple, thereby increasing disharmony significantly. In this circumstance,
the increased disharmony made the couple and Simon move from confrontation into
conflict. The wife cried out and cursed Simon. The husband called Simon’s boss to
complain. Finally, Simon’s boss came to resolve the conflict.
A further survey on some history literature and an analysis of some modern
documents show that there are numerous cases that reflect moderating effects of trust
on negotiations and conflicts. In this paper, we are not going to present all of them.

6. Implications for management

This paper is part of broader research project into the usability of nomology as an
instrument for bridging theory and management practice between different cultures,
regions, and fields of management. The first implication for management is that it shows
that nomology could provide a foundation for researching and providing advice for
cross-cultural management situations in practice. A second implication for management
is that it shows that nomology can provide a framework for incorporating understanding
from a variety of secondary sources, such as traditional Taoist Yin-Yang culture,
management theory, conflict studies, and psychology, in this case about trust.
 This research may be helpful in providing theoretical support for people and Trust in conflict
organizations interested in conflict resolution. Furthermore, it may have practical management
implications for management. In any organizations where there are conflicts, people can
apply the findings in this paper to the solving of conflicts, pursuing positive win-win
solutions. When facing a situation of conflict, one should try to change a destructive
conflict into a less destructive confrontation. When facing a situation of confrontation,
one should make every effort to transform the destructive confrontation into 65
constructive cooperation. When in cooperation already, one should manage to enhance
the cooperation by making it into a more constructive collaboration.
According to our findings in this paper, there are four measures or policies that could
facilitate the above processes. First, one should take a position that values honesty and
trust other than a position that shows dishonesty and trust. Second, one should adapt
him/her self, taking indirect actions through relationships instead of direct actions
through power. Third, one should create and retain harmony between both sides in
conflict and negotiation. Fourth, one should keep a balance between adjusting others,
i.e. making the opponent to change, and adjusting self, i.e. taking adapting actions and
changing oneself, so to achieve win-win negotiation outcomes.
If trust exists in conflict management, if decision makers/representatives for the
parties in conflicts take indirect actions through relationships instead of direct actions
through power and try to create and retain harmony, all the conflicts will be able to be
solved peacefully with win-win solutions. The most important implication is that:
adjusting others and adjusting self should be used in balance in conflict management,
like the way Yin and Yang interact with each other interdependently and coexist forever.

7. Conclusion and discussion

The impact of trust on conflict management in organizational settings has been
examined by scholars. A variety of different conceptualizations and theories have been
used to explore the issues of trust. However, there is comparatively little research that
explores how trust impacts on the outcomes of conflicts and negotiations. In conflict
situations when there are competing interests at stake, trust could play a more important
role and give rise to positive negotiation outcomes. In this paper, we have examined the
issue of trust in the context of conflict management. We have tried to answer the
question of how trust impacts on conflicts and negotiations.
We have related Western nomology to Taoist Yin-Yang thinking for understanding
conflict management, and have proposed a model of trust in conflict management. The
model has characterised the moderating effects of trust and revealed the ways that trust
impacts on conflict and negotiation. Investigations have been conducted and case
studies have been done to explain the model. We have obtained the following findings:
.
keeping a balance between adjusting others and adjusting self is a key to
resolving conflict;
.
creating and retaining harmony is a bridge that leads both sides in conflict and
negotiation to adjust themselves;
.
taking indirect actions through relationships instead of by direct actions through
power is a good way to trigger a state of harmony; and
.
trust is shown to be the original drivers and sources that contribute to adapting
actions, harmony and eventually to win-win negotiation outcomes.
CMS This research has contributed to human knowledge in the following aspects. We have
5,1 offered some new reflections about the roles of trust in conflict management, and shed
light on the ways that trust impacts on conflict and negotiations. Theoretically, this
research may enhance the understanding of Taoist Yin-Yang thinking by linking it
with the Western nomology. Practically, this research may be helpful for people and
organizations interested in conflict resolution who wish to:
66 . take a position that values trust;
.
take indirect actions through relationships instead of direct actions through
power;
.
create and retain harmony between both sides in conflict and negotiation; and
.
keep a balance between adjusting others and adjusting self, so to achieve a
win-win negotiation outcome.

There are two directions for future research. First, some instruments could be used to
measure the relevant variables in the model. Second, some quantitative surveys
covering a wide range of nations and industries could be conducted to extend the test
of the model.

References
Brugha, C.M. (1998a), “The structure of adjustment decision making”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 104, pp. 63-76.
Brugha, C.M. (1998b), “The structure of development decision making”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 104, pp. 77-92.
Brugha, C.M. (1998c), “The structure of qualitative decision making”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 104, pp. 46-62.
Brugha, C.M. (2006), “A meta system for understanding international conflict”, International
Journal of Knowledge and Systems Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 17-23.
Chen, G. and Starosta, W.J. (1997-1998), “Chinese conflict management and resolution: overview
and implications”, Intercultural Communication Studies, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Chen, H.J., Tsai, Y.H., Chang, S.H. and Lin, K.H. (2009), “Bridging the systematic thinking gap
between East and West: an insight into the Yin-Yang-based system theory”, Systemic
Practice and Action Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 173-89.
Hwang, K.K. (1997-1998), “Guanxi and Mientze: conflict resolution in Chinese society”,
Intercultural Communication Studies, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 17-42.
Leung, K., Koch, P.T. and Lu, L. (2002), “A dualistic model of harmony and its implications for
conflict management in Asia”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 201-20.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An integrative model of organizational
trust”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 709-34.
Onishi, J. and Bliss, R.E. (2006), “In search of Asian ways of managing conflict: a comparative
study of Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand and Vietnam”, International Journal of Conflict
Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 203-25.
Parayitam, S. and Dooley, R.S. (2007), “The relationship between conflict and decision outcomes:
moderating effects of cognitive- and affect-based trust in strategic decision-making
teams”, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 42-73.
Roose, P.D. (2006), “A call for research on collaboration versus traditional bargaining in Trust in conflict
labor-management relationships”, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 17
No. 4, pp. 352-5. management
Tasoluk, B., Yaprak, A. and Calantone, R.J. (2006), “Conflict and collaboration in
headquarters-subsidiary relationships: an agency theory perspective on product rollouts
in an emerging market”, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 17 No. 4,
pp. 332-51.
67
Wang, G., Jing, R. and Klossek, A. (2007), “Antecedents and management of conflict: resolution
styles of Chinese top managers in multiple rounds of cognitive and affective conflict”,
International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 74-97.

Further reading
Heifetz, A. and Segev, E. (2005), “Escalation and delay in protracted international conflicts”,
Mathematical Social Sciences, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 17-37.

About the authors

Rong Du is a Professor at the School of Economics and Management, Xidian University, China.
She received her PhD from Xidian University. In the past years, she worked as a Visiting
Professor in the Department of Information Systems and Computing, Brunel University, UK and
the Quinn School of Business, University College Dublin, Ireland. Her research interests include
knowledge management, marketing, and cross-cultural management. Her publications have
appeared in journals such as the European Journal of Operational Research and Expert Systems
with Applications. She is a scholar selected into the New Century’s Excellent Talent Supporting
Program by the Ministry of Education in China. Rong Du is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: durong@mail.xidian.edu.cn
Shizhong Ai is a PhD candidate and Associate Professor at Xidian University, China. He holds
a Master’s Degree from NorthWestern Polytechnical University, China. During 2006-2007,
he worked as a Visiting Researcher in the Quinn School of Business, University College Dublin,
Ireland. His research interests include knowledge management and decision science. He has
published papers in journals such as International Journal of Information Technology & Decision
Making and Expert Systems with Applications.
Cathal M. Brugha is a Professor at the Quinn School of Business, University College Dublin,
Ireland. He received his PhD from University College Dublin. His research interests include
decision science, multiple criteria decision making, and intercultural studies. He has published
many papers in academic journals such as the European Journal of Operational Research, Journal
of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, and Systemic Practice and Action Research.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

View publication stats