The Directness and Oppositional Intensity of Conflict Expression

TLDR

Workplace conflicts have been studied by type, yet how they are expressed remains underexplored. The authors propose a conceptual framework linking the directness and oppositional intensity of conflict expression to how people experience and react to conflict, offering new insights into conflict effects. Directness is determined by expression ambiguity and the parties involved, while oppositional intensity reflects position entrenchment and action subversiveness, and both dimensions are shaped by cultural context and disputant traits. The framework informs future research on conflict by highlighting how expression dimensions influence conflict dynamics.

Abstract

Conflicts in the workplace have been characterized by their type (task, process, relationship), but little attention has been paid to how conflicts are expressed. We present a conceptual framework of conflict expression and argue that understanding how conflicts are expressed can help us gain new insights about the effects of conflict. We propose that conflict expressions vary in their directness and oppositional intensity and that these differences directly influence how people experience and react to conflict, resulting in dynamic escalatory or de-escalatory conflict spirals. We argue that directness of conflict expression is a function of the ambiguity of expression and who is involved (antagonists versus involving other people). Oppositional intensity of conflict expression is indicated by the communicated entrenchment in positions and subversiveness of actions. We argue that while oppositional intensity and directness are universal dimensions characterizing conflict expression, the cultural context and characteristics of the disputants will influence how conflict is expressed and perceived. We consider the implications of our conceptual framework for related research examining conflict.