Conflict Resolution Process in International Joint Ventures: A Theatre
Metaphor Approach
Huu Le Nguyen, Ph D, Assistant Professor
Department of Marketing
University of Vaasa
Wolfintie 34, PL BOX 700, 65200 Vaasa
Finland
Email: nghl@uva.fi
Jorma Larimo, Ph D Professor in International Marketing
Department of Marketing
University of Vaasa
Wolfintie 34, PL BOX 700, 65200 Vaasa
Finland
Email: jla@uva.fi
Abstract
Due to the reason that conflicts are the fact of life, they present in any organizations and
especially in hybrid organizations like international joint ventures (IJVs) where partners are
from different backgrounds, cultures, and having different motives in IJVs. In addition, it is
noticed in international business literatures that conflicts between partners are one of the
main reasons lead to lower IJV performance and even termination of IJV relationship.
Therefore, knowing how to manage conflicts between partners becomes crucial in IJV
relationship. In this paper, we build up a process model for managing conflicts between
partners in IJV relationship by employing theatre metaphor approach. In other words, we
discuss in details how conflict between partners can be resolved by going through each step
of the process. We conclude the paper by offering both theoretical and managerial
implications. also theorists, and by pointing out opportunities for further research. This paper
is believed to have significant contributions to IJV theory and conflict management
knowledge.
Keywords: Conflict management, theatre metaphor approach, international joint ventures
1
Conflict Resolution Process in International Joint Ventures: A Theatre
Metaphor Approach
1. Introduction
Firms often engage in international joint ventures (IJVs) with local firms when they expand
abroad (Dunning, 1995; Dinh, 1997; Li, 2003; Duan & Chuanmin, 2007; Meschi & Riccio,
2008). However, several studies show a high rate of IJV failure (Hennart, Kim & Zeng, 1998;
Bamford, Ernst & Gubini, 2004; Yeheskel, Newburry & Zeira, 2004). There are several
reasons for the failures. However, because firms often have different goals and ways of
operating, it is no wonder that inter-partner conflicts often arise (Fey & Beamish, 1999).
Thus, understanding conflict is crucial to organizations (Boonsathorn, 2007) since the
conflict resolution strategy of a parent firm will affect IJV performance (Fey & Beamish,
1999; Lu, 2006; Yavas, Eroglu & Eroglu, 1994). Parkhe (1993) pointed out that conflicts in
IJVs are one of the four key areas in IJV research besides partners’ motives, partner selection,
performance measurement. Recently, Ma, Lee and Yu (2008) note that conflict management
literature has still received little research attention. Ma et al. (2008) and Doucet et al. (2009)
suggest that further study is needed. Furthermore, researchers maintain that there lacks of
studies dealing with conflict management and resolution in IJV context (e.g. Lin and
Germain, 1998; Nguyen and Larimo, 2011).
On the other hand Sullivan and Daniel (2008) suggest that we need to be innovation and
novel in international business research. Palmer and Dunford (1996), Cornelissen (2004),
Schreyögg and Höpfl (2004), Vera and Crossan (2004), Mantere, Sillince, and Hamalainen
(2007) maintain that metaphor is an important approach for organizational research.
2
Shepherd-Barr (2006) emphasizes of the role of theater metaphor on scientific research,
especially in the study of conflicts of interest. In conflict resolution, many times, it requires
new ways of imagining action and new language which is so rich in metaphors (Foster and
Docherty, 2013). This study applies theatre metaphor approach (Coopey, 1998; Elam, 1980;
Gardner, 1992; Graham-Hills and Grimes, 2001; Kerrshaw, 1992; Mangham and Overington,
1983, 1987; Rosen 1985; Shepherd-Barr, 2006) to manage conflicts between IJV partners.
This managing process is challenges because IJVs have two parent firms and firms are from
different countries with different cultures and often have different goals and ways of
operating. Therefore it is important to apply metaphor approach to understand and gain
insight the complex issues. This study is the first to apply metaphor approach in managing
IJVs. Thus, it aims to contribute to both joint venture theory and conflict management theory.
In the next section, we will first review conflict management research in international joint
ventures. Then we elaborate theatre metaphor approach in detail. After that we build model
for managing international joint venture conflicts using theater metaphor theory. Finally we
discuss the implications of this model in both theoretical and pragmatic perspectives as well
as point out future research opportunities.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Research of conflicts and conflict management in IJVs
Existence of conflicts is a common characteristic of every organization (De Dreu &
Weingart, 2003). It is often regarded as a negative force, a harmful element (Boonsathorn,
2007) leading to discomfort, misunderstanding, and disruption of relationships or even
collapse of organizations (Robbins, 2005). In contrast, Bolton (1986) has more positive view
on conflict as he regards conflict as opportunity. Fisher (1990) suggests that conflicts can
arise when partners perceive the differences in their needs, interests, views, values, or goals.
3
Moore (1996) divides conflicts into five different categories as follows: Data conflicts arise
when information is lacking, differently interpreted or withheld. Interest conflicts occur when
there are actual or perceived scarce resources such as physical assets (money or other tangible
things), procedural issues (how decisions should be made) or psychological issues (who is in
the wrong emotionally). Value conflicts erupt when people have different ways of life, deeply
rooted goals or varying criteria on how to evaluate behaviors. Relationship conflicts prosper
in environments of strong emotions, stereotypes, poor communication and historic negative
patterns. Structural conflicts result from structural inequities in control, ownership, power,
authority or geographic separation.
Fey and Beamish (1999) noticed that most researchers have focused their studies on how
partners can avoid conflicts. However, they argue that conflict must be dealt with because it
is inherent in the relationship. Thus, it is important to understand different kinds of conflict
resolution approach in a partnership, so that firms will be able to resolve conflicts with their
partners.
Fundamentally, conflict management styles are based on concern for self-interest or the
interests of another.
Based on two dimensions of assertiveness (satisfying one’s own
concerns) and cooperativeness (satisfying the concerns of another), Thomas (1976) constructs
five conflict handling strategies: competing, collaboration, compromising, accommodating,
and avoiding. According to Rahim and Bonoma (1979), conflict management strategies
include dominating, obliging, avoiding, compromising, and integrating. Lin and Germain
(1998) and Lu (2006) categorize conflict resolution strategies into four main strategies:
problem solving, compromising, forcing, and a legalistic strategy.
4
After carefully reviewing articles published in leading journals in the field of international
business and international management (Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of
International Management, International Business Review, Management International
Review, International Journal of Conflict Management, Journal of International Marketing,
Table 1. Key studies focusing on conflict resolution strategy from 1994-2013
Study
Focus of study
Yavas et al.
(1994)
Examining severity of
various conflicts in Saudi
Arabia
Ding
(1996)
Examining Chinese
management style in
conflict resolution
Lin &
Germain
(1998)
Establishing the link
between IJV context and
a partner’s conflict
resolution strategy
Morris et al.
(1998)
Examining culture and
conflict management style
Fey &
Beamish
(1999)
Formulating a strategy for
managing conflict in
Russian IJVs
Peng et al.
(2000)
Examining conflict
management style in
Sino-US, Sino-French
enterprises in China
Lin & Wang
(2002)
Examining association
between the preference
for conflict resolution
strategy and relationship
trust and commitment and
relative power
Developing
organizational justice
based on closer relating
of parent control to parent
conflict
Comparing cross-cultural
differences in the
preference of conflict
handling style
Barden et al.
(2005)
Wang et al
(2005)
Method of study
(type of study, data
collection, sample size,
data analysis method)
Empirical study,
Survey
60 executives in Saudi
Arabia
ANOVA
Empirical study,
Interviews
6 US Chinese JVs
Comparative case analysis
Empirical study,
Survey
94 IJV managers, of whom
35 are Americans, 59 are
Chinese
LISREL
Empirical study
Survey with MBA
students
132 US, 100 Chinese, 160
Indians, 62 Philippines
ANOVA
Empirical study,
Interviews
40 Russian IJVs
Case analysis
Results
Empirical study,
Survey
374 Sino-American and
Sino-French IJVs, and 150
from state-owned
enterprises
ANOVA
Empirical study,
Survey
106 Asians & 99 Chinese
Factor Analysis and
Structural equation
modeling
Empirical study,
Survey
75 Vietnamese IJVs
Hierarchical and
moderated regression
Empirical study,
Survey
463 IJV managers: 217
Chinese managers, 124
Asian expatriates, and 122
Western expatriates
Chinese business tends to emphasize uncertainty
avoidance more than western equivalents but both Chinese
and Westerners tend to adopt compromising style
5
Dynamic approach (close monitoring, frequent updating of
goals and continuous cultivation of relationship) should be
used to resolve conflicts in Saudi-US JVs rather than static
approach
Chinese managers tend to adopt contingent, long term,
contextual, and holistic approaches to resolve conflict
Cultural similarity stimulates a problem solving approach;
the more power they have, the more partners use a forcing
strategy and the less relevant a compromising strategy
becomes. The longer an IJV relationship exists, the more
likely partners are to use more problem solving and less
legalistic strategies
Chinese managers rely more on an avoiding style because
of their relatively high value on conformity and tradition.
US managers rely more on a competing style because of
their relatively high value on individual achievement.
Align partner’s objectives, ensure adequate
communication, develop standard procedures for resolving
conflict, consider gains for all parties, developing high
tolerance and understanding for different cultures,
discussing ways to avoid future conflict, ensuring all
parties are committed to the IJV
Trust encourages partners to use a problem solving
strategy. The more power partners have, the more likely
they will use a legalistic strategy
Level of conflicts in IJVs depends on the consistencies
between control structure and parent’s contribution of
proprietary resources, and between control structure and a
partner’s ability to effectively monitor operations
Western managers tend to use forcing and problem solving
more than Asian managers do. Asian managers tend to
prefer compromising styles more than their western
partners. Western managers tend to use legalistic approach
more than Chinese partners
Lu
(2006)
Examining the impact of
conflict resolution
strategies in IJV
performance
Onishi & Bliss
(2006)
Exploring how managers
from Japan, Hong Kong,
Thailand, Vietnam differ
in conflict management
Boonsahorn
(2007)
Analyzing the preferences
for conflict management
styles of Thais and
Americans in
multinationals in
Thailand
Examining how Chinese,
Japanese, Koreans resolve
interpersonal conflict with
their supervisors and the
influence of cultural
factors on conflict
management style
Using transaction cost to
explain how firms should
formulate contractual
governance to get better
efficiency, lower costs,
and minimize conflict
with partners
Examining the role of
horizontal and vertical
individual-collectivism in
explaining conflict
management style
Kim et al.
(2007)
White et al.
(2007)
Komarraju et
al. (2008)
Doucet et al.
(2009)
Comparing conflict
management behavior of
Americans and Chinese
Speakma
n&
Ryals
(2010)
Examining conflict
theory for
management of
multiple
simultaneous
conflict episodes
Examining how
American and
Chinese employees
of multinational
organizations deal
with conflict
between them
Yuan
(2010)
Bisseling
& Sobral
(2011)
To examine and compare
the effects of emotional
and task conflict
on team
performance and
member satisfaction
in two distinct
MANOVA, ANOVA
Empirical study,
Survey
76 Sino-Japanese JVs and
89 Sino-Taiwanese JVs
Regression analysis
Empirical study,
Survey
1825 responses from
Japanese, Thai,
Vietnamese, and
HongKong Chinese
ANOVA, ANCOVA
Empirical study,
Survey
250 Thais and 64
American
ANOVA & Pearson´s
correlation
Empirical study,
Survey
270 employees from
Chinese, Japan, and South
Korea
Hierarchical regression
analysis
Conceptual study
Compromising and legalistic strategies are positively
related to IJV satisfaction in Sino-Japanese IJVs but not in
Sino-Taiwanese IJVs
Managers from Japan, Hong Kong, Thailand, Vietnam
differ in their preferences for conflict resolution strategies
Thais preferred avoiding and obligating strategies. There is
a negative relationship between length of stay abroad for
Thais and preference for a dominating conflict
management style
Koreans more frequently used a compromising strategy
than the Chinese and Japanese did. The Japanese used less
dominant strategy but were more obligated to their
supervisors
Perceived transaction costs influence firms’ choice of
contractual governance mechanisms and conflict
resolution strategy in foreign ventures. Cultural distance,
relative power, and interest alignment will play important
roles in conflict resolution strategy
Empirical study
Survey
640 undergraduate
students (67%European
American, 22% African
American, 4% Latino
American, other)
Correlation and regression
analysis
Individualists prefer dominating styles, collectivists prefer
integrating styles.
Empirical study, structure
interview
62 American and 52
Chinese
Inductive analysis
Conceptual study
For Chinese, embarrassing the colleague, teaching moral
lesson are important elements. For Americans, hostility
and vengefulness are important elements
Empirical study
In depth interviews
20 non Chinese
American, 19
Chinese, 3 Chinese
American from 28
MNCs in China
Comparative case
analysis
Empirical studies
Survey with 366
team member
Interviews with 20
team managers from
the Netherlands and
Brazil
Both American and Chinese employees used various
strategies to deal with conflict. American participants
were more likely to confront a conflict than Chinese
participants. Different motivations may lead to the
exercise of a common conflict strategy
6
In dealing with multiple, simultaneous conflicts, managers
need to consider the possible implication of chosen
strategy along with the changing environment of their
operation
Cultural differences between these two countries not only
influence the way intragroup conflict is experienced, but
also its impact on members’ satisfaction and group
Performance
Traavik
(2011)
Kern at
al.
(2012)
Nguyen
& Yang
(2012)
Kirk et
al.
(2013)
Gross et
al.
(2013)
cultures, Brazil and
The Netherlands
To investigate the
similarities and
differences between
dyads and four-party
groups in an integrative
negotiation.
Data are collected from
subjects experiment. A
total of 182 participants
completed a negotiation
role play and questionnaire
To investigate the
limitation on the
presumption that intercultural negotiation are
doomed to generate low
joint gains
To conceptualize Chinese
conflict management
behaviors as contingent
on the hierarchical
relations of conflict
parties in an
organizational context
and investigate individual
characteristics as
moderators in this
contingency framework
To test the impact of a
self-regulatory strategy of
goal pursuit on interactive
bargaining task
Data collected from 45 bicultural Korean and 47
Americans
To employ Weber´s
analysis of conflict
system, specifically the
distinction between
formal and substantive
rationality to demonstrate
that predominant method
of analyzing of conflict
management focuses too
heavily on the managerial
interests in administrative
efficiency and
productivity rather than
on the needs of
individuals and
organizations
Conceptual paper
For dyads the procedure used (considering more than one
issue at a time) led to higher economic outcomes, and both
procedure and problem solving were important for
subjective outcomes. For four-party negotiations, problem
solving was significantly related to higher outcomes.
Problem solving was significantly more important for the
groups than for dyads on economic outcomes.
Inter-cultural dyads generate higher joint gain than Korean
or US intra cultural dyads. Intercultural negotiators, one
of whom is bi-cultural, who use language, especially the
pronoun “you” to close social distance achieve higher joint
gains than intra-cultural negotiators who do not
Data collected from 704
employees across China.
Multiple logistic analysis
was used to analyze data
Chinese role-playing a supervisor in a conflict with their
subordinate tended to use direct, assertive, strategies to
resolve the conflict but the results depended on age,
education, region, and work experience. As a subordinate
in their conflict with their supervisor, Chinese chose
indirect, harmony, preserving strategies. In a conflict with
a peer, respondents used a broader spectrum of conflict
management strategies, depending on their individual
characteristics.
Data collected from 132
German. Regression
analysis used to analyze
the data
The strategy of mental contrasting with implementation
intentions led dyads to lead the largest joint agreement,
compared to dyads that only use mental contrasting or if
then plans. Participants who mentally contrast formed
more cooperative implementation intentions than
participants who mentally did not mentally contrast,
mediating the effect of joint gain.
Conflict management based on Weber´s theories of formal
and substantive rationality will benefit organizations and
society by promoting a more positive perception of
corporate behavior
Academy of Management Review), we have identified the key studies on conflict
management strategies and have presented them in Table 1. The results in Table illustrate that
most previous studies either focus on analyzing the conflict management styles of parties in
one country (e.g. Ding, 1996; Fey & Beamish, 1999; Kirk et al., 2013; Nguyen & Yang,
2012) or on comparing those employed in two countries (e.g. Doucet et al., 2009;
Boonsathorn, 2007; Kern et al., 2012; Yavas et al., 1994; ) or in a number of countries (e.g.
Kim et al., 2007; Lu, 2006; Onishi & Bliss, 2006; Peng, He & Zhu, 2000). Some also
7
compare the conflict management strategies of western versus Asian firms (Wang et al.,
2005; Peng et al., 2000). And, some researchers used one cultural dimension to analyze the
preference for conflict management strategy (e.g. Komarraju, Dollinger & Lovell, 2008).
In addition, previous studies also focus on providing strategies to avoid conflict (e.g. White
III, Joplin & Salama, 2007; Barden, Steensma & Lyles, 2005) or the effect of cultural
similarity, age of relationship, and the general relative power of partners (e.g. Lin &
Beamish, 1999) on the preference for certain conflict resolution strategies. In short, the past
studies on conflict resolution in IJVs are mostly tactics and lack of studies on the process of
conflict resolution. There is even more limited on conflict resolution studies in IJV context.
This study is therefore to fill this gap.
2.2. Metaphor approach
A metaphor gives directions of interrelationships that are normally nonexistent. A creative
metaphor builds a bridge between two different conceptual domains, which encourage new
visions, innovation and new product development (Cacciaguidi-Fahy and Cunningham,
2007). Metaphor can be used to simplify the complex description of organizations, to convey
information and ideas, ways of thinking using languages (Cacciaguidi-Fahy and
Cunningham, 2007), to highlight the evolution of strategic alliance (Hunt and Menon, 1995)
to understand organizational situations and problems (Palmer and Dunford, 1996).
According to Gibson and Zellmer-Bruhn (2002), metaphor can help firms to build
multicultural teams with common vision. Furthermore, Smith and Eisenberg (1987) view that
metaphors are important in organization as they help members to understand or have cues
from one context to another. In addition, conflict resolution is about change parties´
8
behaviors. Thus, metaphor approach is important in the field because metaphors are used to
introduce changes (Palmer and Dunford, 1996). Through communication, metaphor enables
the connection of different cultures and bonds all stakeholders in joint venture regardless of
their national or organizational cultures (Cacciaguidi-Fahy and Cunningham, 2007).
Theatre metaphor and conflict resolution
Theatre metaphor approach has been widely applied in organizational research (Kendall,
Kendall, and Lee, 2005) since the use of theater as a metaphor to explain and structure a
neurological explanation of consciousness of decision makers (Melody, 2007), and to depict
conflict of interest (Shepherd-Barr, 2006). Furthermore, the theatre metaphor approach looks
at a pre-play period of communication between actors. This period is important as actors have
not decided which strategies to use to resolve conflicts. Therefore, this is a chance for actors
to position themselves and influence each other to have a common solution. According to
Smith and Eisenberg (1987) theater is highly structured, rules governed presentations in
which individuals play clearly defined roles designed to bring about an intended effect.
Another key point of using theatre metaphor approach in resolving conflicts is that the stand
point of actors can change via emotion and rationalizations. Actors in the scene will try to use
emotion and rational debate to influence their own and others´ beliefs and values. This is an
advanced technique since actors cannot simply choose rational moves in isolated
environment with them and with other´s emotions. Thus theatre metaphor approach suggests
that actors´ choices of moves are not only basing on instrumental rationality but also on their
beliefs about the opportunities they perceive, and on characteristic of the players and the
environment they are in. The outcome of attempting to resolve conflict according to theatre
metaphor approach is the result of the interactions related to the evolvement of emotions,
reasoning, exploring, debating, exchange of threats, and promises.
9
The nature of theatre is to help the people to understand issues through metaphoric
communication and providing a communal experience. Using theatre metaphor in conflict
resolution in IJVs is a process of stimulating and sustaining participation of partners using the
world of the theatre to achieve real solutions to practical problems that occur in partnering
relationship affecting IJV operation. Employing theatre may help to transform the people
from being the object to the subject of development. Applying the theatre metaphor in
resolving conflict helps IJV partners to hold effective discussions, constructive dialogue,
understanding and trust toward partners and therefore work out strategies for dealing with
problems that affect them.
The logic of theatre works by creating a fictional narrative of special ongoing relationship
and conflicts which are subject to change by the playwrights and participants. In addition,
theatre work also explores all the aspects of situation, real life understanding, and
relationship. Furthermore, theatre also emphases on conflicts of personality, attitudes,
emotions, interests, and morals. The use of theatre metaphor approach is useful in conflict
management in IJVs as it may help to diagnose the nature of conflict as it re-enacts in a
fictional scene of the dynamics of human interaction and motivation which cause conflicts.
Furthermore, playing roles in theatre; partners have opportunities to understand the other
partners´ viewpoints as they play the antagonists or play third parties. Therefore, partners will
view the conflicted problems more objectively, leading more easily to resolve them.
3. Theatre metaphor in conflict resolution in IJVs
In conflict resolution process under theater metaphor approach, partners agree on the context
and the purpose the conflict resolution process. During the process IJV partners will attend
10
warm-ups for building trust toward each other. Furthermore, they are trained to understand
partner´s skills and function so that they are willing to accept differences which come from
partners´ cultural background and their management styles. In addition, they should be able
to express their true feelings about the conflicts so that when the conflicts are solved, they are
gone and there are no hidden agenda.
Table 2: Actors in conflict resolution in IJVs
Actors in theatre
Actors in IJVs
Playwright:
A person who create the fiction, invents the
Experts or specialists who are directly responsible for
situations and characters
solving conflicts
Director:
A person who manage context of event and the
Foreign parent firms and local parent firms
fiction context
Actors:
Persons who play out the characters in fiction
Managers/employees from both foreign and local
context
partners
Audience (also critic):
Persons who watch, observe, respond, and reflect
Representatives of different departments that are
on the dramatic action
involved in the conflicts.
The theatre process includes scriptwriting, initial reading, workshopping, rehearsals, and the
actual performance (Kendall, Kendall, & Lee, 2005). In scriptwriting stage, through
observation, discussion with involved parties to identify sources cause conflicts, how serious
11
the problem is, and how IJV have been affected by conflicts and how urgently need to solve
conflicts by following IJV performance. As different type of conflicts have different natures
and therefore they require different type of players and their responsibility. A typology of
conflict is useful when the issues in a conflict are centralized in one of the five categories
discussed above.
When different conflicts occur, different responses to conflicts are required. For example, if
a conflict is primarily a data conflict, sharing information and being sure that each party is
interpreting the facts the same way is useful. However, if the conflict primarily is about
values, sharing factual data alone will not solve the problem. In this stage firms may have
initial plan for conflict resolution with its stand and strategies.
In initial reading stage, partners make a plan for different steps of conflict resolution. In this
stage they evaluate advantages and disadvantages when to select specific strategy to solve
conflicts. In initial stage, firms analyze their strategies and anticipate reaction of their partners. For
conflict to be resolved, it is important to know in terms of cultural aspects: not only know
what but know why and how the other partner behaves in such a way. The conflict resolution
process is the continuous development process. Partners need to recognize the forces or
sources causing conflicts. The point in this stage is to know why conflict occurs in IJV
relationship between partners.
In workshopping stage, the plan of partners for conflict resolution does not fix but it opens to
change. Under guiding by parent firms, conflict management teams or conflict negotiators are allowed
to act and try out different alternatives. Through workshopping stage, the players are able to learn
how to respond properly when the other have different moves. In rehearsal stage, negotiation
teams are practicing their negotiation steps, tactics and strategies to get partners to agree with
their proposed solutions. In addition, in this stage, different solutions and alternatives are
12
rehearsed in case if the first priority alternative strategy fails to solve the conflicts, partners
will go on the second best one and so on. Before entering to negotiation table, partners have
to agree on the fundamental of theater that they will be willing to suspend of their disbelief
about the stereotype toward each other or their belief that there is only one solution for the
problem.
Table 3: Process of stages in conflict resolution applying theater metaphor approach
Process stage in
Theatre activities
Process stage in
Conflict
Management in IJVs
Actors
Purposes
Scriptwriting
- Problem
identifications and
evaluation
Representative of
partners, parent
firms
-
To find out sources, types, and
levels, and roles of conflicts
-
To find out different approach and
strategies to solve conflicts
- Strategies formation
Initial Reading
Initial walkthrough
steps of conflict
resolution plan
Representative of
partners, parent
firms
Evaluating advantages and
disadvantages for different conflict
resolution approach and strategies
Casting actors
and actress
Conflict negotiation
team formation
Representative of
partners, parent
firms, and conflict
resolution teams
To select team that will performance
successfully conflict resolution
Workshopping
Brainstorm strategies
to resolve conflict
Conflict resolution
team
Conflict resolution team will test
different approach and strategies to solve
the conflicts to find out the different best
options
Rehearsals
Practicing of conflict
transformation
Conflict resolution
team
The team practice to negotiate with
partners to agree with their solutions
The performance
(The show)
Actual conflict
resolution negotiation
between partners
Representative of
the other partner,
and conflict
resolution team
The conflict resolution team and the
representative of other partners meet to
negotiate for conflict resolution
Post
Performance,
(Critique,
publicity)
Evaluating and trust
rebuilding
Partner firms, IJV
conflict
management team,
customers
To follow up conflict resolution stage
In the performing stage, conflict resolution team meets with their counter partners to negotiate for
conflict resolution. Partners then need to influence the other so that they do recognize the
13
strengths of cooperative behavior and thus encourage partners to create positive responses. It
is important in resolving conflicts that partners try to avoid direct negative comments. To
resolve conflicts in IJVs, partners need also to understand the other and also to make others to
understand their own points. These can be done only through open discussion. Through open
discussion about conflict areas, it is possible to change the ways the other partners perceive,
and therefore they act toward common goal as to maintain IJV performance and therefore
solve the common problems between partners.
The chance for partners to change comes from an active metaphorical dialogue about conflict,
transformation and resolution. Moreover, for conflicts to be solved, partners some time may
need to improvise the solutions as the situation development. They may also need to take off
their shoes and step into the other partners´ shoes to understand the other better. This
changing role helps partners to enter to change their mentality and nature of the negotiation
toward the common solution.
In post performing, parent firms are interested in the feedback and reviews from critics and
audiences such as board of IJVs, representatives of each related departments or even
customers of the IJVs. After conflicts have been resolved, it is important to monitor the short
term and long term effects of the conflict resolution (Nguyen, 2011). In addition, as in
theatre, it is important to have follow-up period to observe, to collect the feedback of the
partners to know if they are really satisfied with the solutions that are implemented.
Furthermore, the effect of the solutions to IJV performance should also be observed.
Depending on the conflicts types and level of conflicts, the length of this post-performance
will last. Mechanisms for follow-up are evaluating partner actions, behaviors, and
performance against what have been agreed upon during the resolution process (Nguyen,
2011). In addition, social exchange and personal relationships may help to regain trust and
neutral negative energies of the ventures and help to reaffirm commitment of partners into
14
IJVs. Personal connections and relationships are not only crucial for conflicts resolution but
also for post conflict follow-up.
4. Conclusions
Metaphor approach has been proven as an important approach in management research (e.g.
Mantere et al., 2007) as it enables us to make sense of the complex and unfamiliar problem
(Foster & Docherty, 2013). We adopted theatre metaphor approach to analyze conflict
resolution between partners in IJVs. The theatre metaphor provides partners opportunity to
solve the conflicts by stepping out their current reality with current thought, constraints, and
viewpoints to allow them to try different solutions as well as to understand other partner´s
view point, logic and motives. This will allow partners with creative thinking and coming up
with problem solving solution.
Applying theatre metaphor approach can help partners to realize different cultural awareness,
and to have collective thought. In addition, theater metaphor can help partners to objectify
the various stands in understanding sources of conflicts between partners. Conflict resolution
leads to a higher level understanding of each other. By discovering the value of different
opinions, progress in conflict resolution becomes possible. Theatre metaphor approach helps
partners to step into others´ shoes and thus they can see the issues from the other partner´s
viewpoints. Thus, it helps to avoid deadlock in conflicts resolution since it allows the
viewpoints to be changed.
Since previous studies on conflicts resolution in IJVs are very tactics (see table 1), and
assuming that conflict resolution is one time transaction, this study offers the process model
that specify which actors, actions, and activities are needed in each step of conflicts
resolution. As the present study is the first to apply theater metaphor approach to the process
of conflicts resolutions in IJVs, it enriches IJV literature. Furthermore, the study benefits for
15
managers of IJVs in such a way that managers know how to manage to resolve conflicts with
their partners through step by step of the process model proposed earlier.
Limitations and Future Research
This paper offers the process model of conflict resolution using theater metaphor approach. In
general the model could be applied for any conflict resolution in IJVs. However, the conflict
should be concerned to strategically important for partners really take time and go through all
stages of the process to ensure the success of problem solving. In addition, employing the
theatre metaphor in conflict resolution does not work if partners do not hold on to the
agreements and decisions reached in the process. Furthermore, this is only a theoretical
discussion; future studies can use empirical data to test our proposed model. As the model
proposed in this paper is a process model, longitudinal studies will have better chance to
capture the issues and therefore they are of interests for further research.
References
Bamford, J., Ernst, D. & Gubini, D. G. (2004). Launching a world class joint venture.
Harvard Business Review, 82 (2), 91-100.
Barden, Q. J., Steensma, H. K. & Lyles, M. A. (2005). The influence of parent control
structure on parent conflict in Vietnamese international joint ventures: an organizational
justice-based contingency approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 36, 156174.
Barkema, H. G. & Vermeulen, F. (1997). What differences in the cultural backgrounds of
partners are detrimental for international joint ventures? Journal of International
Business Studies, 28 (4), 845-864.
16
Berrell, M. (2007). The Nature of power, control, trust and risk in international joint ventures:
implications for relationships and performance. In Business Networks and Strategic
Alliances in China, Clegg Stewart, Wang Karen, and Berrell Mike (Eds.) Northampton,
MA, USA, Edward Elgar, 29-55.
Bolton, R. (1986). People skills: How to assert yourself, listen to others and resolve conflict.
Australia: Prentice Hall.
Boonsathorn, W. (2007). Understanding conflict management styles of Thais and Americans
in multinational corporations in Thailand. International Journal of Conflict Management
18 (2), 196-221.
Brouthers, K. D. & Bamossy, G. J. (2006) Post-Formation Processes in Eastern and Western
European Joint Venture. Journal of Management Studies 43 (2), 203-229.
Cacciaguidi-Fahy, S. & Cunningham, J. (2007). Use of strategic metaphors in intercultural
business communication. Managing Global Transitions 5 (2), 133-155.
Clark, T. & Mangham, I. (2004). From Dramaturgy to Theatre as Technology: The Case of
Corporate Theatre. Journal of Management Studies 41:1, 37-59.
Cornelissen, J. P. (2004). What are we playing at? Theatre, organization, and the use of
metaphor. Organization Studies 25 (5), 705-726.
De Dreu, C. K. & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus Relationship Conflict, Team
Performance, and Team Member Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88 (4), 741-749.
Ding, D. Z. (1996). Exploring Chinese conflict management styles in joint ventures in the
People’s Republic of China. Management Research News 19 (9), 43-53.
17
Doucet, L., Jehn, K. A., Weldon, E., Chen, X. & Wang, Z. (2009). Cross-cultural differences
in conflict management: An inductive study of Chinese and American managers.
International Journal of Conflict Management 30 (4), 355-376.
Duan, J. & Chuanmin, S. (2007). Ownership, control, and performance of U.S.-China joint
ventures: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship
12 (1) 25-35.
Dunning, J H (1995). Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in the age of alliance capitalism.
Journal of International Business Studies 26 (3), 461-493.
Fey, C. F. & Beamish, P. W. (1999). Strategies for Managing Russian International Joint
Venture Conflict. European Management Journal 17 (1), 99-106.
Fisher, R. (1990). The social psychology of intergroup and international conflict resolution.
New York: Springer.
Foster, R.W. & J.S. Docherty (2013). Embracing small spaces: A useful metaphor with
strong impact. New Routes 18 (1), 7-9.
Gibson, G. B. & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. (2002). Minding your metaphors: Applying the concepts
of teamwork metaphors to the management of tensions in multicultural context.
Organizational Dynamics 31 (2), 101-116.
Ghauri, P. N. (2003). Introduction. In P.N. Ghauri and J-C Usunier (eds.), International
Business Negotiation (2nd ed). Oxford: Pergamon, 3-20.
Glaister, K. W. & Buckley, P. J. (1996). Strategic Motives for International Alliance
Formation. Journal of Management Studies, 33 (3), 301-332.
Gross, M. A., Hogler, R. & Henle, C. A. (2013). Process, people, and conflict management in
organizations. A viewpoint based on Weber´s formal and substantive rationality.
International Journal of Conflict Management 24 (1), 90-103.
18
Hennart, J.-F., Kim, D.-J. & Zeng, M. (1998), “Is cross culture conflict driving international
joint venture instability? A comparative study of Japanese-Japanese and JapaneseAmerican international joint ventures in the United States,” Strategic Management
Journal, 20 (1), 15-29.
Hunt, S. D. & Menon, A. (1995). Metaphors and competitive advantage: evaluating the use of
metaphors in theories of competitive strategy. Journal of Business Research 33, 81-90.
Jehn, K. & Weldon, E. (1997). Managerial attitudes toward conflict: Cross-cultural
differences in resolution styles. Journal of International Management 3 (4), 291-321.
Kendall, K, E., Kendall, J. E., & Lee, K. C. (2005). Understanding disaster recovery planning
through a theatre metaphor: Rehearing for a show that might never open.
Communications of AIS 16, 1001-1012.
Kern, M. C., Lee, S., Aytug, Z. and Brett, J. M. (2012). Bridging social distance in intercultural negotiations: “you” and the bi-cultural negotiator. International Journal of
Conflict Management 23 (2), 173-191.
Kim, T. Y., Wang, C., Kondo, M. & Kim, T. H. (2007). Conflict management styles: the
differences among the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans. International Journal of Conflict
Management 18 (1), 23-40.
Kirk, D. and Oettingen, G. & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2013). Promoting integrative bargaining:
mental contrasting with implementations. International Journal of Conflict Management
24 (2), 148-163.
Komarraju, M., Dollinger, S. J., & Lovell, J. L. (2008). Individualism-collectivism in
horizontal and vertical directions as predictors of conflict management styles.
International Journal of Conflict Management 19 (1), 20-35.
Li, X. (2003). Control in Japanese-Chinese joint ventures: Antecedent factors and effect on
performance from Japanese viewpoint. Asian Business & Management, 2:3, 371-395.
19
Lin, X. & Germain, R. (1998). Sustaining Satisfactory Joint Venture Relationships: The role
of conflict resolution strategy. Journal of International Business Studies 29 (1), 179-196.
Lin, X. & Wang, C. C. L. (2002). Relational contexts of conflict resolution strategies in
international joint ventures: An intra-Asia case. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 1
(3/4), 23-35.
Lorange, P., Morton, S. & Ghoshal, S. (1986). Strategic Control. St. Paul: West
Lu, L.-T. (2006). Conflict resolution strategy between foreign and local partners in joint
ventures in China. Journal of American Academy of Business 8 (1), 236-240.
Ma, Z., Lee Y. & Yu, K.-H. (2008). Ten years of conflict management studies: Themes,
concepts and relationships. International Journal of Conflict Management 19 (3), 234248.
Mantere, S., Sillince, J. A.A. and Hamalainen, V. (2007). Music as a metaphor for
organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management 20, 447-459.
McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their
consequences: A triumph of faith – a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55(1), 89118.
Meschi, P. & Riccio E. L. (2008), “Country risk, national cultural differences between
partners and survival of international joint ventures in Brazil,” International Business
Review, 17 (3), 250-266.
Melody, J. (2007). Playing with Metaphor: The effects, problems, and appeal of using a
theater metaphor to frame a neurological understanding of consciousness. Explorations:
An Undergraduate Research Journal 10, 97-110.
Moore, C. (1996). The mediation process, 2nd ed. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass.
20
Morris, M. W., William, Y. K., Leung, K., Larrick, R., Mendoza, T. M., Bhatnagar, D., Li, J.,
Kondo, M., Luo, J.-L. & Hu, J.-C. (1998). Conflict management style: Accounting for
cross-national differences. Journal of International Business Studies 29 (4), 729-748.
Nguyen, H. L. & Larimo, J. (2009). Foreign Parent Strategies, Control and International Joint
Venture Performance. International Business Research 2 (1), 1-13.
Nguyen, H. L. & Larimo, J. (2011). Determinant of Conflict Management Strategy in
International Joint Ventures: An Integrative Theoretical Framework, Journal of
Transnational Management, 16(2), 116-132.
Nguyen, H-H. D. & Yang, J. (2012). Chinese employees´ interpersonal conflict management
strategies. International Journal of Conflict Management 23 (4), 382-383.
Onishi, J. & 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 17 (3), 203-225.
Palmer, J. & Dunford (1996). Conflicting uses of metaphors: Reconceptualizing their use in
the field of organizational change. Academy of Management Review 21 (3), 691-717.
Parkhe, A. (1993). Strategic alliance structuring: A game theoretic and transaction cost
examination of inter-firm cooperation. Academy of Management Journal 36 (4), 794829.
Peng, S., He, Z. & Zhu, J. (2000). Conflict management styles among employees of SinoAmerican,
Sino-French,
and
State-owned
enterprises
in
China.
Intercultural
Communication Studies 9 (2), 33-46.
Rahim, M. A. & Bonoma, T. V. (1979). Managing organizational conflict: a model for
diagnosis and intervention. Psychological Reports 44 (3), 1323-1344.
Robbins, S. P. (2005). Organizational Behavior, 11th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
21
Schreyögg, G. & Höpft, H. (2004). Theatre and Organization: Editorial Introduction.
Organization Studies 25 (5), 691-704.
Shenkar, O., Luo, Y., & Yeheskel, O. (2008). from “distance” to “friction”: substituting
metaphors and redirecting intercultural research. Academy of Management Review, 33,
(4), 905–923.
Shepherd-Barr, K. (2006). Science on Stage. Princeton University Press, 15-40.
Speakman, J. & Ryals, L. (2010). A re-evaluation of conflict theory for management of
multiple, simultaneous conflict episodes. International Journal of Conflict
Management 21 (2), 186-201.
Smith, R. C. & Eisenberg, E. M. (1987). Conflict at Disneyland: A root-metaphor
analysis. Communication Monographs 54, 367-380.
Sullivan, D. P. & Daniels, J. D. (2008). Innovation in international business research: a
call for multiple paradigms. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (6),
1081-1090.
Thomas, K. J. (1976). Conflict and conflict management. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Wang, C. L., Lin, X., Chan, A. K. K. & Shi, Y. (2005). Conflict handling styles in
international joint ventures. A cross cultural and cross national comparison. Management
International Review 45 (1), 3-21.
White, O. G. III, Joplin, J. R. W. & Salama, M. F. (2007). Contracts and conflict resolution
strategies in foreign ventures: a transaction cost perspective. International Journal of
Conflict Management 18 (4), 376-389.
Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Theatrical improvisation: Lessons for organizations.
Organization Studies 25 (5), 727-749.
22
Yavas, U., Eroglu, D. & Eroglu, S. (1994). Sources and management of conflict: The case of
Saudi-US joint ventures. Journal of International Marketing 2 (3), 61-82.
Yeheskel, O., Newburry, W. & Zeira Y. (2004). Significant differences in the pre- and postincorporation stages of equity international joint ventures and international acquisitions
and their impacts on effectiveness, International Business Review 13, 613-636.
Yuan, W. (2010). Conflict management among American and Chinese employees in
multinational organizations in China. Cross Cultural Management: An International
Journal, 17 (3), 299-311.
23