To read this content please select one of the options below:

Scissors cut paper: purposive and contingent strategies in a conflict situation

Christopher J. Meyer (Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA)
Blaine McCormick (Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA)
Aimee Clement (Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA)
Rachel Woods (Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA)
Chuck Fifield (Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA)

International Journal of Conflict Management

ISSN: 1044-4068

Article publication date: 28 September 2012

702

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to focus on a little studied but important type of conflict, zero‐sum situations. These conflicts are less likely to take place than those in which participants can come to an integrative agreement, but knowing how to best strategize for zero‐sum conflicts can lead to better outcomes in these situations.

Design/methodology/approach

Participants in the study utilized two specific strategies – purposive or contingent – in a rock‐paper‐scissors elimination tournament. The use of the strategy and the outcome were measured in a controlled setting.

Findings

Results demonstrate that using a strategy in a win‐lose conflict situation significantly predicts success. Further, competitive individuals are more likely to utilize strategies than other personality types.

Originality/value

This paper builds on the theory that individuals in conflict situations have preferences, pursue goals, and behave purposefully. In particular, the paper studies the antecedents to strategies employed in a conflict situation and that strategy's effect on the outcome.

Keywords

Citation

Meyer, C.J., McCormick, B., Clement, A., Woods, R. and Fifield, C. (2012), "Scissors cut paper: purposive and contingent strategies in a conflict situation", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 344-361. https://doi.org/10.1108/10444061211267254

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2012, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles