Intercultural Conflict Styles

To recognise various intercultural conflict styles* and build

Key objectives
strategies to respond to conflicts using adaptive behaviours

Time 45 minutes -1 hour

The Model of the Intercultural Conflict Style
Materials
The Strengths and Weaknesses
* Inspired from M. Hammer, Hammer Consulting Group, LLC, International Peace and Conflict Resolution, 2005

Introduction:
Our conflict style is learned during socialization in our primary cultural community and modified via
contact with other cultural communities.
intercultural conflict resolution style denotes a group’s preferred manner for dealing with
substantive disagreements and communicating emotion during conflict.
Conflict style differences are central in escalating conflict because they act as an “accelerator.”

Instructions:
Step 1. Check the Description of the Intercultural Conflict Styles on page 3
Step 2. Identify your own Intercultural Conflict Style and move to one of the 4 corners of the room,
based on ICS diagram above (far left corner – Discussion style, far right corner - Engagement style,
front right corner - Dynamic style and front left corner - Accommodation style)
Step 3. Think about a recent conflict, with a person from a different cultural background, and identify
the relevant ICS aspects that played a role in the conflict.
Step 4. Individually, using the Strengths and Weaknesses sheet, page 4:
- think about what sort of changes in your behaviour (including attitudes) could support a conflict
resolution.
- think about how to facilitate the discussion during the conflict, considering the ICS of your
partner.
Step 5. Conflict resolution groups are formed (Discussion vs Engagement; Engagement vs Dynamic;
Dynamic vs Accommodation, Accommodation vs Discussion).

Discussion vs Engagement Engagement vs Dynamic

Accommodation vs Discussion Dynamic vs Accommodation

Together with your group, come up with as many conflict-resolution strategies possible, based on
the 2 aspects mentioned in step 4.
Step 6. List the conflict-resolution strategies in the table below:

Changes in self Facilitating changes in the discussion

1. 1.

2. …

Step 7. Sharing results

Description of the Intercultural Conflict Styles
(Excerpt from M.R. Hammer, The Intercultural Conflict Style Inventory: A conceptual framework and measure of intercultural conflict
resolution approaches, 2005)

The Engagement style (direct & emotionally expressive) emphasizes a more verbally direct and
confrontational approach toward resolving conflict that is infused with an emotionally expressive
demeanour. This style tends to view sincerity of each party toward a positive resolution of a
conflictual dynamic as embedded in the degree of concern that is demonstrated through more
intense, verbal and non-verbal expression of emotion. North America (United States (African
American)), Europe (France, Greece, Italy, Spain, Russia), Central & Latin America (Cuba, Puerto
Rico), Middle East (Israel)

The Discussion style (direct & emotionally restrained), personal engagement of the parties where
disagreements are verbally confronted and emotion is ‘‘put on the table.’’ Discussion Style
North America (United States (White American), Canada), Europe (Netherlands, Great Britain,
Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany), Asia Pacific (Australia, New Zealand)

The Accommodation style (indirect & emotionally restrained), describes an approach to conflict
resolution that emphasizes a more indirect approach for dealing with areas of disagreement and a
more emotionally restrained or controlled manner for dealing with each party’s emotional response
to conflict. This style emphasizes ambiguity and circumlocution in language use in order to help
ensure that a conflict does not ‘‘get out of control.’’ Maintaining emotional calm and reserve is
essential to this style for enabling interpersonal harmony to counter relationally damaging
disagreements among the parties. This style, therefore, views more intense expressions of emotion
as potentially dangerous and generally inhibitory toward ‘‘effective’’ conflict resolution processes.
Indirect speech, use of intermediaries, and minimizing the level of conflict present among the parties
are all specific strategies an Accommodation style may likely employ. North America (Native
American), Latin America (Mexico, Costa Rica, Peru, Argentina), Asia (China, Japan, Thailand,
Indonesia, Malaysia)

The Dynamic style (indirect and emotionally expressive) involves the use of more indirect strategies
for dealing with substantive disagreements coupled with more emotionally intense expression. This
style may typically involve such linguistic devices as hyperbole, repetition of one’s message, a more
‘‘associative’’ argument structure, ambiguity and use of third party intermediaries coupled with
more emotionally confrontational discourse and expression. The credibility of each party is
grounded, within this style, in the degree of emotional expressiveness one demonstrates toward the
disagreement and toward the other party. Arab Middle East (Kuwait, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon)
Intercultural Conflict Styles - Strengths and Weaknesses
Discussion Conflict Style
Self-Perceived Strengths:
- Confronts problems
- Elaborates arguments
- Maintains calm atmosphere
Engagement Conflict Style
Self-Perceived Strengths:
- Provides detailed explanations,
instructions & information
- Expresses Opinions Directly
- Shows feelings
Accommodation Conflict Style
Self-Perceived Strengths:
- Considers alternative meanings to
ambiguous messages
- Able to control emotional outbursts
- Sensitive to feelings of the other party
Dynamic Conflict Style
Self-Perceived Strengths:
- Uses third party to gather information
and resolve conflicts
- Skilled at observing changes in nonverbal
behaviour
- Comfortable with strong emotional
displays
Weaknesses as Perceived by other Styles:
- Difficulty in reading “between the lines”
- Appears logical but unfeeling
- Appears uncomfortable with emotional
arguments
Weaknesses as Perceived by other Styles:
- Appears unconcerned with the views &
feelings of others
- Appears dominating & rude
- Appears uncomfortable with viewpoints
that are separated from emotion
Weaknesses as Perceived by other Styles:
- Difficulty in voicing own opinion
- Appears uncommitted & dishonest
- Difficulty in providing elaborated
explanations
Weaknesses as Perceived by other Styles:
- Rarely “gets to the point”
- Appears unreasonable and devious
- Appears “too emotional”