跨文化冲突与跨文化管理

世界经济一体化进一步促进了企业跨国经营,而跨国经营的结果必然带来跨文化冲突管理。价值观不同是导致跨文化冲突的根本原因。跨文化沟通障碍是导致跨文化冲突的直接原因。思维和工作习惯不同是跨文化冲突的重要原因。跨文化冲突造成的不利影响是多方面的。跨文化冲突管理是跨文化管理的核心。跨文化管理策略主要是树立正确的跨文化观念、建立统一的价值观、实行管理本地化策略、学习异质文化。     

凝聚与激活:管理冲突的两大正向功能

管理冲突,在此专指管理过程中存在着的冲突,以及对这种冲突进行管理.管理冲突具有正向功能和反向功能.限于篇幅,本文仅就其正向功能中的凝聚功能和激活功能做一论述.(一)凝聚功能.管理冲突对于维持组织存在的疆界、增强组织群体的向心力,具有聚拢、整合和凝结作用.主要表现在三个方面:一是通过组织内部的冲突、矛盾和斗争,达到消除分歧、统一认识、协调行动的目的,从而大大增强成员的归属感和身份感;二是通过与外部的冲突、竞争,可以使组织在整个社会系统中的地位得以加强和提升,并维持组织存在及其与周围社会环境的界限;三是通过冲突、矛盾和斗争,可以实现冲突双方或多方的互动,从而使各自都更臻于完备和完善.(二)激活功能.在组织运转过程中,通过管理冲突,使其成员产生一种振作、活跃、向上、同心协力为实现组织目标而奋斗的良好气氛.激活功能大体有如下四个方面:一是信仰激活;二是观念激活;三是情感激活;四是工作热忱和工作干劲的激活.     

对突发公共卫生事件中行政应急性原则的思考

行政应急性原则是指在某些特殊的紧急情况下 ,出于国家安全、社会秩序或公共利益的需要 ,政府可以运用紧急权力 ,采取紧急措施来应对瘟疫、灾害、事故等紧急危险事件。我国政府抗击SARS突然袭击的一系列行为表明 ,这实质上是突发公共卫生事件中行政应急性原则的体现 ,这也告诉我们必须尽快健全行政应急制度。     

论组织冲突成因及管理对策分析

组织总是不断面对各种矛盾与冲突。组织的沟通不畅、架构不合理、成员的差异和组织资源的不足,都可造成冲突。组织冲突的管理水平关系着组织内部的和谐与稳定。冲突问题处理不当,直接影响组织目标的实现甚至威胁组织的生存和发展。必须认识到冲突具有正反两方面的作用,管理者应运用合理的管理策略将破坏性冲突转化为建设性冲突,使组织能够不断自我反省,不断创新与进步。文章通过分析、探讨组织冲突的类型和原因以及相关管理对策,为组织冲突管理的研究探索新的思路。     

公共冲突管理中的第三方干预

第三方干预是帮助冲突双方实现冲突平息和冲突和解的重要手段,它可以促进冲突双方的有效沟通、提高双方对冲突方案的承诺和满意程度,权威性是第三方干预的基本前提。其干预方式包括制造缓冲期和冷却期、建立或改进对话渠道以及直接裁决。第三方干预是否能够取得成功,取决于第三方是否能够坚守中立和公正、是否拥有较高的公信力以及是否选择了恰当的干预时机。     

冲突及其管理

本文论述了冲突的定义及一般分类方法,描述了五个冲突过程:起因、感知与内化、行为倾向、行为类别及结果。提出了冲突管理策略,即对不良冲突的处理和对组织内部冲突水平的控制。     

冲突视角下的高校硕士生兼职管理

高校硕士研究生兼职成为一种普遍现象,它在缓解学生经济压力、提高就业竞争力、促进自我认知的同时,也产生了一系列冲突与问题。为完善高校硕士生兼职管理提出如下建议:建立相应的兼职管理机构;完善硕士生奖助学体制;制定学校兼职指导规范;帮助学生做好职业生涯规划;建立与企业的合作机制。     

从冲突管理到协调治理:新时代青年亚文化引领的思维转换

冲突管理思维对社会秩序的偏执性追求、对青年亚文化的过度管控,损害了青年亚文化的自运行机能,在一定程度上也破坏了社会的整体文化生态。协调治理思维主张对青年亚文化采取分类治理与分级治理相结合、宏观引导与微观规范相结合、平等互动与协商合作相结合、动态均衡与整体最优相结合的治理原则与治理方法,有助于实现青年亚文化与主流意识形态的良性互动和社会整体文化生态的良性发展。     

种族冲突与国家弱化--兼论弱化国家的行政管理

冷战后,种族冲突和民族分离主义在世界各地迅速泛滥,对世界和平与发展构成严重威胁.本文认为,世纪之交种族的冲突和民族分离主义与民族国家的弱化有密切关系,国家弱化主要表现在两个方面一是民族国家在管理职能上的弱化,二是殖民主义分而治之的殖民遗产造成民族国家发展上的弱化,国家弱化加深民族冲突.     

社会组织参与冲突管理的功能与可行性分析——基于与公共行政组织的比较视角

社会组织和公共行政组织具有不同的特点,其在公共冲突的治理过程中表现出不同的方式和特点,具有功能互补性。针对于公共行政组织在公共冲突治理过程中所面临的自上而下的体制性压力、冲突治理负担过重、体制性迟钝、行政化色彩过强、中立性较差、被动反应式的管理模式等欠缺,社会组织借助于利益整合和利益表达、冲突中的信息沟通和传递、创造建设性地冲突解决方案等公共冲突参与方式来实现其推动公共冲突化解的功能,在冲突的预防以及公共冲突的化解过程中发挥重要作用。在以政府主导为主、以冲突平息为目的的冲突处置途径向强调社会组织多元参与、致力于冲突深度解决的冲突化解途径转变的时代背景下,社会组织也拥有了越来越多参与公共冲突治理的空间。     

综合化：政府应急管理体制改革的方向

当前突发事件日趋呈现多样化、复合化的特点。原有的应急管理体制难以应对公共危机多发、易发和重发的挑战。建立高度组织化的现代应急管理体系势在必行。改革政府应急管理体制,可以从制度上保证有效整合政府应急管理资源,提高全社会应对公共危机的动员能力。其主要思路就是提高政府应急管理体制综合化程度,明确其目标、重点及推进策略。     

Compliance and Conflict Management in the European Union: Nordic Exceptionalism

Why and to what extent do states differ in their implementation of international norms? Furthermore, why and to what extent do states differ in their mode of resolving conflicts regarding non‐implementation of international norms? In this article the empirical focus is on implementation of Community legislation by the member states of the European Union (EU) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). The analysis shows that over time there has been an overall reduction in the deficit in transposition, but the number of conflicts regarding non‐implementation has increased in the same period. While states converge on transposition, they diverge regarding their mode of handling conflicts related to non‐implementation. In general, the larger member states more frequently use court rulings to settle such conflicts. By contrast, the smaller states, and in particular the Nordic states, pursue a more consensus‐seeking approach, with limited use of courts. These observations indicate that domestic traditions and styles of decision making are more important for explaining variation than the enforcement capacity of the European institutions, and the extent of participation and power in decision making at the European level.     

Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing and Post-Civil War Conflict Management

This article examines how power-sharing institutions might best be designed to stabilize the transition to enduring peace among former adversaries following the negotiated settlement of civil wars. We identify four different forms of power sharing based on whether the intent of the policy is to share or divide power among rivals along its political, territorial, military, or economic dimension. Employing the statistical methodology of survival analysis to examine the 38 civil wars resolved via the process of negotiations between 1945 and 1998, we find that the more dimensions of power sharing among former combatants specified in a peace agreement the higher is the likelihood that peace will endure. We suggest that this relationship obtains because of the unique capacity of power-sharing institutions to foster a sense of security among former enemies and encourage conditions conducive to a self-enforcing peace.     

Shaping the Scope of Conflict in Scotland’s Fracking Debate: Conflict Management and the Narrative Policy Framework

This study applies a narrative lens to policy actors’ discursive strategies in the Scottish debate over fracking. Based on a sample of 226 newspaper articles (2011–2017) and drawing on key elements of the narrative policy framework (NPF), the research examines how policy coalitions have characterized their supporters, their opponents, and the main regulator (Scottish government). It also explores how actors have sought to expand or contain the scope of conflict to favor their policy objectives. Empirically, only the government strives for conflict containment, whereas both pro‐ and anti‐fracking groups prioritize conflict expansion through characterization contests and the diffusion and concentration of the costs/risks and benefits of fracking. In theoretical terms, the study proposes that Sarah Pralle’s conflict management model, which emphasizes symmetrical strategies of conflict expansion by both coalitions, is a potential tool to revise extant NPF expectations about the different narrative strategies of winning and losing coalitions. Moreover, the fact that policy actors mostly employ negatively rather than positively framed characters in their narratives may be a valid expectation for similar policy conflicts, particularly under conditions of regulatory uncertainty.     

Interstate Partnerships in Emergency Management: Emergency Management Assistance Compact in Response to Catastrophic Disasters

The Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) is a mutual aid agreement and partnership that allows states to assist one another in responding to natural and man-made disasters, often in advance of federal disaster assistance. This article examines EMAC's response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in order to address the significant need for analysis of emergency management at the state level. A content analysis of news reports, government documents, and reports from a number of institutions was performed to determine the volume and direction of EMAC's performance and its transactions during the response operations. The authors find a lack of EMAC training among responders, potentially reducing communication and coordination and the efficiency and effectiveness of response operations. A network analysis assessed the relationships among the responding organizations to coordinate their emergency response operations.     

Assessing and Managing Environmental Risk: Connecting Local Government Management with Emergency Management

Ensuring that a community is prepared to deal with a disaster is among the many tasks public managers are charged with addressing. Disaster preparedness and response requires adherence to standard planning practices, yet disasters are typically unpredictable. Dealing with disasters, therefore, requires a blend of traditional management skills and improvisation. Furthermore, like other aspects of administrative leadership, the top administrator must blend initiation and responsiveness in interactions with elected officials and a careful delineation of responsibility in handling actual emergencies. This article discusses how local administrators assess risk and balance preparedness needs within a universe of daily operational needs. Managing environmental risk is also explored from a political and legal context.     

A Theory of International Conflict Management and Sanctioning

In this paper we analyze sanctioning policies in internationallaw. We develop a model of international military conflictwhere the conflicting countries can be a target ofinternational sanctions. These sanctions constitute anequilibrium outcome of an international political market forsanctions, where different countries trade politicalinfluence. We show that the level of sanctions in equilibriumis strictly positive but limited, in the sense that highersanctions would exacerbate the military conflict, not reduceit. We then propose an alternative interpretation to theperceived lack of effectiveness of international sanctions, byshowing that the problem might not be one of undersanctioningbut of oversanctioning.     

Conflict and Collaboration in Wildfire Management: The Role of Mission Alignment

Responding to large wildfires requires actors from multiple jurisdictions and multiple levels of government to work collaboratively. The missions and objectives of federal agencies often differ from those of state land management agencies as well as local wildfire response agencies regarding land use and wildfire management. As wildfire size and intensity increase over time and associated annual suppression costs range between $2 billion and $3 billion, learning more about the existence and management of perceived agency differences becomes imperative within the academic and practitioner communities. This article examines the extent to which perceived mission misalignment exists among federal, state, and local actors and how well those differences are managed. Findings provide quantitative evidence that mission misalignment is greater within intergovernmental relationships than within intragovernmental relationships. Additionally, findings speak to the larger conversation around intergovernmental relationships within the federal structure and perceptions of the presence and management of potential interagency conflict.

Practitioner Points

• Potential conflict between the missions of federal and state land agencies presents a challenge for disaster management, and differing governmental levels and land‐use mandates may highlight relationships where tensions are likely greater.
• Wildfire managers may need to more proactively address relationships among federal agencies and state and local partners rather than relationships among multiple federal agencies.
• Wildfire management may benefit from increased awareness of—and discussion around—partner agencies’ stated land management philosophies and legal mandates, as structural frameworks, such as the Incident Command Structure, may not alone lead to conflict‐free collaboration.

     

State Wildlife Policy and Management: The Scope and Bias of Political Conflict

State wildlife policy and management are often characterized by divisive political conflict among competing stakeholders. This conflict is increasingly being resolved through the ballot-initiative process. One important reason the process is being used so often is the way state wildlife policy and management decisions are often made by state wildlife commissions, boards, or councils (the dominant way these decisions are made in the United States). These bodies are often perceived by important stakeholders as biased, exclusive, or unrepresentative of nonconsumptive stakeholder values. As a result, unsatisfied interest groups often try to take decision-making authority away from these institutions and give it to the public through the ballot initiative. Cases and examples from Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, and Idaho are examined in this context. The article finishes by outlining four broad alternatives that may be debated in the future: the no change alternative, the authoritative expert alternative, the structural change alternative, and the stakeholder-based collaborative conservation alternative(s).