The Oxford Handbook of Conflict Management in Organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New ways of managing conflict are increasingly important features of work and employment in organizations. In the book the world's leading scholars in the field examine a range of innovative alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices, drawing on international research and scholarship and covering both case studies of major exemplars and developments in countries in different parts of the global economy. Developments in the management of individual and collective conflict at work are addressed, as are innovations in both unionized and non-union organizations and in the private and public sectors.<br/><br/>New practices for managing conflict in organizations are set in the context of trends in workplace conflict and perspectives on how conflict should be understood and addressed. Part 1 examines the changing context of conflict management by addressing the main frameworks for understanding conflict management, the trend in conflict at work, developments in employment rights, and the influence of HRM on conflict management. Part 2 covers the main approaches to conflict management in organizations, addressing both conventional and alternative approaches to conflict resolution. Conventional grievance handling and third-party processes in conflict resolution are examined as well as the main ADR practices, including conflict management in non-union firms, the role of the organizational ombudsman, mediation, interest-based bargaining, line and supervisory management, and the concept of conflict management systems. Part 3 presents case studies of exemplars and innovators in the field, covering mediation in the US postal service, interest-based bargaining at Kaiser-Permanente, 'med-arb' in the New Zealand Police, and judicial mediation in UK employment tribunals. Part 4 covers international developments in conflict management in Germany, Japan, The United States, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and China. <br/><br/>This Handbook gives a comprehensive overview of this growing field, which has seen an huge increase in programmes of study in university business and law schools and in executive education programmes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".