An exploratory-formulative study of executive dispute handling capability, morphology, measurement and modalities

Abstract

Dispute handling capability is a critical resource in society given that disputes are an ever present reality in social, economic and political activity spheres. Over the years, there has been a surfeit of scholarly endeavor in the social sciences and in applied fields of research in understanding the morphology and substance of disputes. The main contribution of the current study to this genre of research would be to examine one important aspect of this area of research - disputes handling capability.

Dispute handling capability in this study will be examined in the organizational-managerial context and, therefore, the subjects of this study will be executives working in organizational contexts. Since dispute handling capability is present, experienced, acquired and utilized not only in an executive’s organizational and professional life but also in his/her personal and social life, this study proposes to decode this capability as experienced behind and beyond concrete situations. This means that the endeavor to decode executive dispute handling capability will cover both situations wherein the executive himself/herself is resolving personal disputes as well as wherein the executive is functioning as a neutral third party in resolving disputes. The dispute handling capability frame of reference underlying both forms of experience structures - personal dispute handling as well as third party dispute handling - is the focal point of this research. Utilization of the capability may vary given variations in the structures due to contextual constraints, but the dispute handling capability frame of reference is behind the handling. It is this dispute handling capability frame of reference that this study is trying to capture and measure.

It is for this reason that this study is of an exploratory-formulative nature. Research can be in the replication, development or discovery modes. Replicative studies simply repeat studies done elsewhere in Toto the only variation being the context difference. Development studies take existing studies forward by trying to test new relationships or newer insights emerging out of earlier studies. Discovery research tries to bring into being some new insights in areas which have not yet been explored in explicit, overt ways. Exploratory work in the direction of developing empirical insights could be classified under this latter category.

The research was carried out in 3 phases. In the first phase, 30 incidents of dispute from Mahabharata were outlined. Described and subsequently analyzed to draw insights into dispute handling and the capability required to handle disputes better. In the second phase, 30 exploratory in-depth interviews were carried out with executives from varied backgrounds and demography to get an insight into the concept of executive dispute handling capability using the critical incident technique. Based on the literature review, the analysis of 30 Mahabharata incidents and 30 in-depth interviews, a Likert type scale was developed to measure Executive Dispute Handling Capability and its dimensions. This scale was pretested using pilot survey. In the third phase of the research, findings from the qualitative methods were validated through survey method. Data was collected personally from the cities of Delhi, Jamshedpur, Calcutta, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Mumbai, and Ahmedabad. The organizations varied in terms of their location, product, services, workforce, turnover, and organizational culture. The questionnaires were given to executives from various departments within the organization using convenience sampling. In total, I000 questionnaires were given out. Of these 540 returned the questionnaires (54%) and 505 of these were found to be usable responses.

The study has identified the Morphology of EDHC in terms of five dimensions -artfulness, diplomacy, detachedness, fair mindedness and sagacity. Measures were developed for EDHC dimensions. The study validated the scales for EDHC dimensions and returned high reliability figures for all. Analysis of the data indicated that socio-economic correlates in terms of age, work experience, gender, marital status, number of children, caste. Education, family income, and personality type were significantly correlated with EDHC dimensions. Among organizational correlates, organizational culture, presence of union, product type, organizational profile and organizational workforce profile were significantly correlated with EDHC dimensions. Dispute Handling Training was found to be significantly correlated with EDHC dimensions. The correlates helped in understanding EDHC modalities in the social and organizational spheres.

The study is a pioneering endeavor to examine empirically the concept of executive dispute handling capability (EDHC), to develop an instrument to measure EDHC through its five conceptual dimensions, and also to identify the socio-economic and organizational correlates of EDHC, From the practitioner’s point of view, the study will help in diagnosing EDHC, which can form the basis of mentoring and coaching programmes designed to develop these capabilities in executives.