Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CHAPTER 1
lawyer does, the staffs do. Resolution of disputes, using a standardized set of
rules, is a skill in the legal practice (Raasch, 2014). Hence, knowing legal
staffs conflict resolution styles will help the law firms Human Resource (HR)
unmanaged conflict can be chaotic. Members of the law firms who have
new ideas and achieve new outcomes and if members work together for these
goals, collaboration progresses and creates new opportunity for growth and
and shows defense mechanism, which are influenced by the law practice
styles that are developed and used here in the Philippines can be reflective of
46
certain factors surrounds the staff themselves and the professional culture
itself.
which has been implemented in the southern part of the Philippines is Legal
address conflicts in an organization for both inside and outside the legal
partnering with the Conflict Resolution Group (CoRe) and obtain an Executive
Order from the president and trained legal practitioners around Mindanao
region.
goal (Boucher, 2013). Reio and Trudel (2013) cited that it is necessary for
can also benefit. In fact, study shows that some of the employees are not still
terms of:
1.1. Sex
1.2. Age
of:
2.1. Avoidance
2.2. Collaboration
2.3. Competitiveness
2.5. Accommodation?
and status.
48
This section presents the prominent points from various literatures and
studies which are relevant to this study. This further explain points,
observations and fact cited by experts regarding the study specifically conflict
resolution style of legal staff, results and factors affecting resolution styles. In
Conflict
long list of definitions of conflicts. As cited by Lather, Jain a& Shukla (2010),
conflict is a common issue in humans daily life, this are coming from
experience conflict along with joy and sorrow. As mentioned by Lather, Jain
and Shukla (2010) it has been a natural phenomenon to ones personal and
49
(Bennagen & Ye, 2016). Moreover, Huan and Yazdanifard (2012) said that
people think of conflict in basic terms, it only happen when serious issues and
Conflict is part on individuals daily life. Conflict may refer to any states
Yazdanifard (2012), one of it is task conflict and focuses on the ways on how
to resolve it. The other type of conflict is called the relationship conflict and
conflict based on two facades, first is when a person always consider himself
and his own concerns and the second is when a person consider others and
50
conflicts in the workplace, 62 percent of the main issues came from conflicts
work ethics.
from different circumstances, the call for making an effective and efficient
management style with full courage and risk-taking are very important. By
preparing the people that will engage to conflict the negative effects produced
(ibid.).
Along with this, Azurin (2013) also believed that conflicts do not all the
the interaction or leave the relationship with the other party. However,
organization.
from individual tensions due to differences working differently for the same
goal and second is the division of labor because most of the organizations
assigns an individual to a specific job and in a specific section and it will lead
for the conflict to arise. First view was if the competition for resources,
Zhu (2013) affirmed the idea of Ahamefula (2014) that the emerging conflict
includes reasons for conflict to arise and have categorized three causes or
conflict concerns should be known and parties should decide what the conflict
is about. The third stage is the Intentions it is the intervention of third party to
the conflicting persons and intervenes to the parties perception, emotion and
The fourth stage is Behaviour wherein this stage conflict is more perceptible
thus parties are more focused to this stage since implementation is hereby
necessary. The last stage is Outcomes which means conflicting parties faces
the consequences of the conflict. There are two kinds of outcomes: functional
organization that stressed out due to lack of functional conflict. The company
had become the most known internet brand in 1999 however, the companys
stock was down to 92 percent from its peak last 2001 the problem where the
organization cannot adapt and innovate since managers and staffs settled in
maintaining the status quo since the CEO had a policy of a conflict-free time
but the organization changed strategy and since then they gradually solved
the problem.
background, ethics, and values. Like for example, a long term employee who
feels loyal which can have conflict to a newcomer who sees the organization
can be easy to know what would conflict resolution style they will use and
age and educational level had no significant relationships with any of the five
conflict resolution styles among college leaders. Additionally, data shows that
motivation and conflict resolution styles. Data was collected from leaders that
styles were related to more than one of the motivation sources. Only
style of leaders.
upon the ability of all parties to understand the benefit of conflict resolution
and perhaps more importantly, their desire to resolve the matter. He pointed
54
those tips that may help in effectively handling conflicts in the workplace:
(Whats In It for Me) Factor, The Importance Factor, and View Conflict as
Opportunity.
should know how to resolve conflict by using the three steps to navigate with
organization follow and enforce those rules. It is given that human should
have set of rules to govern and control their behaviour (ibid). Second, select a
the organization will needed rarely, but if the organization can develop internal
1980s the experts know they conflict resolution style and shows effectively
and efficiently way to reduce court litigations and demolish winners and losers
(Schieberl, 2010).
report that the need of using conflict resolution style to business organizations
percent said that they face conflict always or frequently and only around 14
percent said that they dont deal with disputes. When they were asked what
triggers the conflict in workplace research founds that almost half of all the
34 percent said that conflict is caused by stress while 33% pointed pressure
resolution styles to protect relationship amongst other of the staffs. It was said
that dwelling with the past issues should not be done to create greater ability
to resolve the conflict, know if the case youre trying to win for is worth your
time and effort and lastly know when to let the argument be ignored.
style and lastly assess if the conflict resolution style is effectively resolve the
issue.
56
aforesaid author, Gross and Guerro (2010) rated the accommodating style as
the most effective while the avoiding style is the least effective. The
style when engaging different types of people. If an individual only use one
conflict management style in handling all conflict it may not work as it was
expected to be.
Graham (2010), that there were several conflicrt resolution style philosophies
and interactionist. The style behind traditionalist is to get free or resolve the
conflict; the next style is the behavioralist which is very similar to traditionalist
philosophy the only contrary is that behavioralist do not always look-after the
conflict that will eventually damage the organization; and lastly and the most
historically used was the interactionist which perceived that when using this
philosophy, people tends to always continue to resolve the conflict that hinder
(2010) said that ideas need to be challenged if the organization wants to see
show that collaborating and compromising resolution style was the most used
is significantly related. The result shows that the nationality of the deans from
significantly influence the styles of deans from both universities. Both the Thai
early stages, before getting worst. Remain calm; it helps to look at the big
(Berman, 2013).
knowing or assessing the conflict resolution style can help in improving law
58
resolve disputes.
more than one style even if those styles are not appropriate for the issues,
and that they react to a certain dispute based on how they feel and not what
can use the appropriate conflict resolution style to use in a specific conflict.
the major theoretical framework of this research study. The five conflict
Competitive Style
engenders the common win or lose scenario that follows from a high degree
of concern for self and a low degree of trust in the other party.
Raasch (2014) said that, lawyers who are involved with a workplace
conflict with the staffs resolution has to do with getting the other person or
entity to change a scenario where there will be a winner and another party a
loser. Toku (2014) argued that in conflicts where quick decision should be
made and people involved are unskilled with conflict resolution, manager can
59
adapt this strategy. However, subordinates who are skilled may see their
according to Waithaka (2014) as the parties involved are aggressive and only
want to ensure that their needs are met which commonly used by parties that
are not interested in preserving the relationship. The goal of a dominant party
in the disagreement is to win at any costs regardless of the damage that will
his or her side regardless if its on the other persons expense in whatever
forms for him or her to win his or her stand (Trainer, 2010). This style will
surely create a winner and a loser, and it will bring advantages and
and will gain hatred that will result in bad work ethics (Boyer, 2011). Thus, the
Competitive people are having most likely high regard for himself and
low regard for the other (Reio and Trudel, 2013). Most of the times, vigorous
attitudes are used just to win the argument (Reio and Trudel, 2013).
Moreover, competitive individual ignores the feelings of the other side, seems
want to succeed at any cost, and is willing to use power and authority to
goes all out to win his or her objective and as a result he or she ignores the
60
standing up for ones right and defending a position that the party believes to
be correct. For example, dominating staffs is likely to use his or her position
and power to impose his or her will on the subordinates and command their
obedience.
Caonera (2013) mentioned that people who use this conflict resolution
style take a firm stand, and know what they want. They usually operate from a
position of power, drawn from things like rank, expertise or the authoritative
position which you believe is correct, or simply trying to win (Thomas &
Killmann, 1970). Moreover, this style can be very useful when there is an
emergency and decision needs to make fats; when the decision is unpopular;
selfishly. However it can leave people feeling hurt, unsatisfied and resentful
resolution style this is because it is a definitive win-lose result that leaves the
loser unsatisfied with the result and emphasize the competitive attitude of the
perspective.
resolution style when you need to act or get results quickly. However, he
mentioned that competition is critical when you are aware that something is
his or her own concerns at the other persons expense, using whatever
authority seems applicable to win his or her position the ability to argue.
concern at the expense of the other party. Robbins (2015) defines competitive
goals of the company. However, there is a high potential that the losing party
may hold feelings of resentment that can lead to another conflict because the
and will result to incomplete and ineffective solution to the problem. Moreover,
people who use this conflict resolution style think that hearing there concern
Hayes (2015) held that using this style will initially give you satisfaction
but will surely affect the long-term relationship and if overly used, may create
the business.
Orlan and Svetnicka (2013) mentioned that competition type skills would
and feelings, standing your ground, and stating your position clearly.
and will result to incomplete and ineffective solution to the problem. Moreover,
people who use this conflict resolution style think that hearing there concern
trigger conflict and becomes more important or set a pattern this conflict
resolution style is generally used. However, since one of the party is being
dominant this conflict resolution style can intensify the conflict and loser may
Akintayo (2016) revealed that both male and female staffs should not
use and avoid this conflict resolution style in managing an industrial dispute
style tries to satisfy ones own needs at the expense of the needs to the other
63
party and usually this is achieved by the means of formal authority physical
Pourghaz, et.al. (2014) found out that competitive style and has no
mentioned that there was no significant relationship with job satisfaction and
Collaborating Style
staffs is working together dealing with the concerns of all members also,
they were able to consider the full range of alternatives and differences;
becomes more clearly focused and resolved problems more satisfying thus, it
conflict management since this is the only strategy that both party can win but
satisfy both parties and agreements to solve the issue and this conflict
think best results for them rather than just thinking of own interest.
64
stated that this strategy has two unique foundations: confrontation and
having a third party to manage the conflict to have a more collaborative result.
First, the chance of resolving the issues and having used its skills are not
given to the staffs who is the first-hand person experiencing the conflict that
means to some point the root of the issue may not be satisfy and only the
treats of it. Second, as there are issues and disagreements that they cannot
Orlan & Svetnicka (2013) says that collaboration uses many ideas from
multiple people leading not only to the best solution, but a better solution than
produces such positive results some people believe it should always be the
collaboration would be suitable for times when issues are too significant to
any dispute would only be by the means of careful and effortful examination of
the aims and well-being of all the persons involved. Research shows that
there is high possibilities of attaining peace when they are both have high
may partially have difficult working out the ways in which all can achieve their
goals. However, since the relationship is vital to goal attainment parties may
desire to satisfy fully the concern of all parties (Robbins, 2015). Toku (2014)
added that the use of this style invoved important variables such as,
exchanging ideas.
conflict resolution style is best used when a person use most goals in the
reputation is important then the person is best advised to think about all ways
66
Moreover, the risk of using this type of conflict resolution style is when
style, unless they agree and settle with the agreement rules for collaboration,
needs to be at the right level Coburn (2013) said, he mentioned also that if the
both parties doesnt have authority or knowledge or wont invest time, then
also believe that this conflict resolution style focuses on problem solving and a
try to reach the desired outcome for both parties and use this style complying
with their preference and their preference by the relationship of factors like
through honest discussion. For this style to be successful, trust and openness
are required among all participants (Bennagen & Ye, 2016). Also, Toku (2014)
strategy will be more appropriate when it came to dealing with social conflicts
and issues which were strategic in nature also produce good result when
further believed that one of the disadvantages of this style is that it can be
67
time consuming because everyone must depart happy. Also, both parties are
work.
for a team to work and without rooting to this fact, collaboration will be very
Additionally, it was promoted to use this conflict resolution style for male and
efficient strategy.
Chaudhry, et.al (2011) exposed that this conflict resolution style is the
when using this conflict resolution style since it increases the level of
Accommodating Style
of negative feelings and also bitterness can be developed for the person using
disregards his or her concern to give the other person satisfaction. Basically,
important to the other party. It is also said that it is useful when a party is
willing to give up thinking that he or she may get something from the other
strategy. It was also discussed in the study of Corn (2013) that this conflict
need ones personal need just to end the conflict. Furthermore, this style is
most applicable when one party give something of value to the other party in
exchange of something in future when he/she needs helps says Toku (2014).
This style usually used when the issue in conflict is valued to the other party
Orlan and Svetnicka (2013) held that situations indicating use of this
can cause problems if the person keeps track of all the times he or she
obeying orders.
This style is one of the most effective resolution styles. Participants are
willing to accept the fact that others have meritorious positions, and then
attempt to understand their thinking and respect the differences (Boyer, 2011).
Moreover, this is supported by Maitlo, et.al (2012) saying that this conflict
Caonera (2013) said that this conflict resolution style give in to others,
charity, obeying another persons order when one would prefer not to, or
more to the other party, when peace is more valuable than winning or when
one want to be in position to collect on this favour gave. However, people may
not return favors and overall this approach unlikely to give the best results
(Caonera, 2013).
respondents who are hesitant to stand up for their own concern and which
only looking after the others interest tending to admit quickly that they failed
However, it was noted by same author that accommodation can result in the
simply investing relationship with his or her co-worker; this approach is best
Coburn (2013) said that this conflict resolution style is best used when
you or your company are at fault, repairing the relationship is critical, and if
you have nothing else that would benefit the other party. It is worth giving up
most especially when you both stand to lose if one of you put out of context.
Therefore, the faulty thinking that puts accommodate into negotiation damage
control is thinking that because the goal is unimportant to one person, it must
(2014) this conflict resolution style is best used when different parties consider
the perspective and need of each other since one party ignores its personal
(2015) cited that this style is preferred when the concern being argued is
much important over the other party since people who use this conflict
71
resolution style have passive behaviour believing the goal of this strategy
status of the staff and accommodating is frequently used when the conflicting
harmony and social desirability, but diminish the potential of creativity and
collectivistic society.
individual factors since in this view, it is conferred that individual order their
Avoiding Style
address the conflict and are indifferent to each others needs and concerns.
They escape the argument, withdraw from the negotiation process or may not
even look for resolution. Thus, the people who are using this conflict
resolution style tends to employ seeks to escape the whole conflict resolution
use this style do not confront one another to try and come up with a resolution
to the conflict. Sometimes parties care for each others perspective in using
this conflict resolution style or just ignoring it. Moreover Waithaka (2014)
believed that this is not an appropriate style for a workplace dispute as it does
not deal with the core of the conflict believing that avoiding the conflict means
Avoiding involves a low concern for self and others. According to Wang
(2015) an avoidant person always fails to satisfy his or her personal interests
as well as the other party. This strategy is helpful when there is a potential
73
negative effect when one party confronts the other. Moreover, this strategy is
adopts by people with a poor history of dealing with conflict and this is also a
destructive conflict resolution style because using it means conflicts never get
and that of others too thinking that a party is not worth confronting the other
party. Thus this strategy requires patience on the part of both parties.
times when the issue is not of high importance; tensions need to be reduced,
avoidance are the ability to withdraw, ability to sidestep issues, ability to leave
unfavourable to a legal office. This style makes person concerned to avoid the
person and circumstance that creates conflict (Boyer, 2011). Under this
conflict style, may be postponed or ignored (Bennagen & Ye, 2016). In some
other party. They do not address the conflict. Avoiding might take the form of
discuss on issue (Chu, 2011). Moreover, Yasin and Khalid (2015) added that
this conflict management style can be passive since a person tends to avoid
or ignores the conflict and it is characterized by a persons low concern for his
stepping solutions (Abas, 2010). This also implies, that an individual will either
2016). Additionally Corn (2013) stated that this conflict resolution style deals
conflict without dealing it, it is used when the level of conflict is too high and
The disadvantage of this style is that conflict that is not dealt with can
delay long-term goals and avoiding conflicts may cause boiling of emotions
which may result in failing to achieve the organizations goal (Bright, 2012).
Coburn (2013) said that when the value of investing time to resolve the
conflict outweighs the benefit or the issue under negotiation is trivial and
sometimes there is just not enough at stake to risk a difficult conflict situation.
through thus, it is better to allow people in the organization to calm down first,
let the anger leaves the organization so that rationality may appear.
Additionally, Coburn (2013) pointed that this conflict resolution style is best
On a lighter note, Caonera (2013) said the brighter side of this conflict
resolution style is that it can maintain the relationship within the organization.
However, it does not resolve the conflict. In fact, avoiding the problem does
much a party is willing to change positions and move in order to work out the
conflict and it will lead to collaborative style of conflict resolution since this
style demand parties work together to come up with or without solution. When
the balance of power is fairly distributed among the parties involved, conflict
handling styles that are agreed upon will benefit both parties.
According to Maitlo, et.al. (2012) the avoiding style users are quite
problem because they dont possess the fundamental knowledge of their own
concerns or the others besides not being much aware of the problem itself.
With such contexts where there are lesser resources to employ ultimately
stretching the problem. Hence people who avoid the problem are expected to
The danger of this was also discussed by Coburn (2013) saying that
whoever has the greater insistence will usually end up with the short end of
seeking to avoid conflict and their avoidance conflict resolution style instead
lands in more conflict. Thus, when differences are eventually aired, emotions
and arbitrary position are often more difficult and fixed than they need (ibid.).
76
The avoidance conflict resolution style was found out by Chaudhry et.al
(2011) to make worse the negative effects of both task and relationship
conflicts due to the people involved are not actively seeking to deal with the
conflicts and avoidance will naturally make matters worse since avoiding
means that collecting bargaining and negotiation are the conflict management
Compromising Style
while others see compromise as both parties winning. There may be times
equal, or when resolving the issue is of utmost priority. The skills attached to
77
equally satisfactory for the both parties (Trainer, 2010). This is conceivably
position before thinking that they needed it during the process of resolving
According to Toku (2014) this style is not suitable for handling complex
problem that requires problem solving since this style may not be applicable in
situations where one party is more powerful that the other party. Thus this
Wang (2015) said that it is useful when both of the conflicting parties have the
same level of goal and understanding towards the conflict but this style is not
However, Wang (2015) stated also that most of the management practitioners
78
possibility of failing to fix the issue and create an effective long-term solution.
dealing with conflict Corn (2013) said since this will make you realize that it
requires trust and competition to loss and better give up a little to end the
argument.
high to moderate emotional levels, high to low conflict resolution skill level,
prevention to punishments.
In this style, there is no clear winner and loser but rather, it gives a ratio
2015). Moreover, Yasin & Khalid (2015) stated that this conflict resolution style
makes the person who is using this strategy very sacrificial just to solve the
resolution strategy where either of the parties abandons their initial desires,
those involved. In this style, parties seek to compromise where the conflicting
parties relinquish certain concerns to settle and achieve a resolution that will
place when there is an equal consideration for ones own concerns and the
communication of all the concerns among the persons involved and through
so the respondents were asked about the relationship of conflict towards co-
give three criteria in measuring the quality of the decision reached, normative
the least used in the five resolution style (Abas, 2010, Graham, 1998).
maturity other than the other, as this style needs individual to give-up
style occurs when each staff must give up something of value to help resolve
the conflict since this situation emerges no winner nor loser each staff yields
equal strength opponents are at an end and when there is a deadline which is
fast approaching. Caonera (2013) stressed out also that the objective of this
resolution style is when you are pushed for time and you are dealing with
someone you trust. Meeting halfway reduces problems in the relationship, bit
usually leaves a good impression on the table. Additionally, Yasin & Khalid
(2015) cited that it is frequently used when the person have to achieve
critical issues to be discussed. Thus, when you have nothing left to offer, and
involve while on the other side, it will not give satisfaction to both parties in the
Coburn (2013) said that it is not good to use this conflict resolution
style when you use this as an excuse for not preparing properly, if the
things that you absolutely must have. Coburn (2013) also cited that one of the
position with no strong rationale, the other party may assume that you are
going to continue to make more concerns and may appeal from the other
party by using a weak rationale. Whichever negotiator starts with the more
ambitious opening position wins the compromise and use calculate early on
standstill since compromising as conflict resolution style cheat both sides out
of innovative solutions.
81
conflicts and it was found to positively relate to team cohesiveness and firm
attempt to obtain partial satisfaction for both parties, in a way that both are
dispute resolution.
satisfaction and found out that managers who used the compromise style had
higher self-awareness.
A research by Reio and Trudel (2013) showed that this kind of conflict
standards which will strategically reduce the tensions resulted from conflict
the assertions of this study. As discussed, this theory reveals two different
compromising.
83
MAIN VARIABLE
1. Avoidance
2. Collaboration
3. Competitiveness
4. Compromise
5. Accommodation
1. Sex
2. Age
3. Education
4. Status
5. Length of Service
MODERATING VARIABLE
The results of this research study would help the following persons and
clientele:
Legal Staff. This study would enable them to access, and utilize their
resolution.
conflict resolution styles of their legal staff in the firm and will help them in
DEFINITION OF TERMS
For clearness of key terms used in this research study, the functioning
Legal Offices. This refers to the selected law firms in Davao City
CHAPTER 2
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The research method that was used in this study was descriptive
method. This method can easily determine the latest demographic profile of
topic; its best used when research is a fact-finding study and when collection
level of demographic profile of staff in legal offices and the conflict resolution
Research Subject
The staffs of legal offices in Davao City were the respondents of this
study, which was defined as any employees under the supervision of the legal
office. The research used convenient purposive sampling where the status
and responses were considered confidential at utmost care. The sample was
respondents.
Research Instruments
The research instrument used in this study was adapted from Johnson
& Johnson (2010). This questionnaire was showed to the adviser for
noted and integrated. The adviser identified the demographic profile of the
research respondents.
The questionnaire is divided into two parts. Part one (1) is the
demographic profile of the respondents and part two (2) was based on the
indicators from the Thomas and Killman Conflict Resolution Style Model
VALUE
preferable.
87
highly preferable.
specific indicator is
moderately preferable.
indicator is low
preferred.
preferred.
research data.
conduct the study was given to the Head of Office of the selected Legal
the following:
Mean. This was used to know the conflict resolution styles among staff
of legal offices.
difference on the conflict resolution style among staff of legal offices when
CHAPTER 3
The results and findings of this study are presented in this chapter. The
data was culled from the thirty (30) respondent staff and secretaries of the
selected legal offices in Davao City. The researcher used the validated survey
Villanueva Zeta Bata & Evangelio Law Offices, Delgra Law Office, Batiller &
Sarmiento Law Offices, Camino Law Office, and Dumlao Consultancy &
Notary, to know the conflict resolution styles among its staff and secretaries.
Thus, this study believes that it will be a great help to law offices
human resource manager, in order for them to know the right arbitration
from January 3, 2016 to March 3, 2016. There were 30 respondents with the
respondents sex. Data shows that twelve (12) or 40 percent are male and
90
eighteen (18) or 60 percent are female. Data says four (4) or 13 percent are
under 20 years old, sixteen (16) or 53 percent are 21-30 years old, six (6) or
20 percent are 31-40 years old, three (3) or 10 percent are 41-50 years old
the law offices respondents educational attainment. The table further reveals
that the biggest number is consist of eighteen (18) or 60 percent who are
bachelors degree holder, while high school graduate, graduate studies and,
service, thirteen (13) or 43 percent are 1-5 years in service, nine (9) or 30
percent are 5-10 years in service, six (6) or 20 percent are 10-15 years in
service, and two (2) or 7 percent of them are 15 years and above in service.
91
Table 1
Profile of Respondents
mean of 3.75. The respondents said that in the area of arguing their case with
peers, colleagues and co-workers to give value to the position, they take the
defending their side of the issue, the respondents said that they highly use it
with a mean of 3.70. In the area of upholding their solutions to the problem,
In terms of convincing the other person of the logic and benefit of the
position respondents said that they highly use it with a mean of 3.80.
and co-workers, respondents replied that they highly use it with a mean of
3.83.
answers to conflict, and it was discovered that they use authoritarian and
Table 2
take.
the issue.
the problems.
others in order to find solutions that are mutually acceptable, the respondents
can be solved together, the respondents said that they highly use it with a
mean of 3.73. On the other hand, in the area of bringing everyones concerns
out into the open in order to resolve disputes in the best possible way, the
In addition, in the area of trying to overcome with any disgust that might
exist between them, they said that they moderately use it with a mean of 3.47.
Finally, in the area of trying to dig into an issue to find it a solution good for all
of them, the respondents said that they moderately apply it with a mean of
3.37.
Moorhead and Griffin (2015) stated that parties to conflict may initially
have difficulties working out the ways in which all can achieve their goals.
However, because the relationship is vital to goal achievement, the parties are
Ferreres (2014) added that this style reflects a desire to fully satisfy the
desires of both parties and that when this approach is used, the relationship
Table 3
possible.
legal staff. Generally, the respondents said that they moderately use it with an
overall mean of 3.34. The respondents said that in terms of trying to avoid
being singled out and keeping conflict with others to themselves, they highly
use it with a mean of 3.67. In the area of not taking position that will create
controversy, they said that they moderately apply it with a mean of 3.37.
were asked in terms of avoiding from topics that are sources of disputes with
co-workers, they said that they moderately apply it with a mean of 3.17.
conflict, the respondents said that they moderately apply it with a mean of
3.23.
was perceived to be the most frequency used conflict resolution style by their
conflict would damage their relationship. Staff may fear to argue with their
colleague especially when they are arguing with the senior/older staff that will
cause fear of retribution and fear about their achievements might be affected
Table 4
Avoidance
themselves.
to them.
workers.
of Accommodation.
legal office staff. Particularly in the area of attempting to meet the expectation
of others, the respondents said that they highly do it with a mean of 3.97. In
colleagues, peers and co-workers, the respondents said that they highly do it
suggesting that differences are trivial and showing goodwill by blending their
ideas into those of other people, they said that they moderately do it with a
mean of 3.37.
3.73. Generally the respondents said that they highly do it with an overall
mean of 3.61.
conflict resolution style while countries like Japan and Australia secondly
countries have cultures and traditions seemingly alike with the Philippines.
100
Table 5
Accommodation
expectation of others.
less important
co-workers.
other people.
of Compromising
legal office staff. The respondents said that in terms of compromising through
the person about the conflict at the right time they said that they highly do it
the respondents were asked in terms of meeting halfway with others they said
something else the respondents said that they moderately do it with a mean of
3.43. Generally, the respondents said that they highly do it with an overall
mean of 3.47.
Lather, Jain and Shukla (2010) said that in Korea, a study was
but it does not explore the issue in as much depth as work together does
(Conlon, 2010).
102
Table 6
Compromise
through negotiation.
level of conflict resolution style when grouped according to their sex. In terms
significant value. For collaboration, results shows that it has a 0.896 p-value
have a p-value of -0.38 and a f-ratio of 0.71 means that there is no significant
of -0.63 and f-ratio of 0.532 which still have no significant relationship. Lastly,
in compromising, have a -0.98 and 0.34 p-value and f-ratio, respectively which
Although significant relationship was not found for a lot of the research
was not unexpected. According to Brusko (2010), men can manifest both
male and female physiognomies on the same thing women can also do both.
Moreover, most of the previous study came to the same result with
in relation to sex and conflict resolution styles. Thus, data shows consistency
with previous studies that there is no relationship between sex and conflict
resolution styles.
105
Table 7
Significant Differences on the Level of Conflict Resolution Style When
Analyzed According to Respondents Sex.
of conflict resolution style among the staff of legal offices when respondents
f-ratio of 0.454. In the area of collaborative, the f-ratio is 0.232 with an overall
mean of 3.61. Further in the area of avoidance, the overall mean is 3.34 with
resolution style. But the above findings are identical with the study of Havenga
age and gender have only small relationship or none either when analyzed to
Table 8
Significant Differences on the Level of Conflict Resolution Style When
Analyzed According to Respondents Age.
Educational Background
mean of 3.61 and a p-value of 0.22 which leads to accepting the Ho.
p-value of 0.63 accepting its Ho. Last of all, in compromising, results shows an
observed. Among the five (5) conflict resolution styles, only competitiveness
background.
Table 9
Significant Differences on the Level of Conflict Resolution Style When
Analyzed According to Respondents Educational Background.
Civil Status
them are single and the others are married. The data when analyzed
Data shows relevance with the result of the study of Voki and Sontor
(2010) that when looking at the differences in conflict resolution styles with
show any significance between civil status and conflict resolution styles, this
Table 10
Significant Differences on the Level of Conflict Resolution Style When
Analyzed According to Respondents Civil Status
Length of Service
style among staff in legal offices when respondents are grouped according to
their length of service. This is manifested on their f-ratio 0.27, 0.83, 0.76, 0.14,
of service a respondent had been in the legal office and the level of preferred
conflict resolution styles and it was found out that there was no significant
relationship was found. This means that the hypothesis was accepted and
relationship since age was not a factor in the respondents preferred conflict
service the respondent had been in the organization because the older the
Table 11
Significant Differences on the Level of Conflict Resolution Style When
Analyzed According to Respondents Length of Service
CHAPTER 4
recommendation. The study was mainly conducted to find out the conflict
resolution style used by staff and secretaries of legal offices through the
there was a significant difference when grouped according to their sex, age,
resource that can greatly contribute on recruitment and selection and training
and development.
Summary of Findings:
Based on the data presented, the following were the findings of the study:
1. The profiles of the respondents, in terms of gender forty percent (40%) are
male and sixty percent (60%) are female. Among the 30 respondents, fifty-
three percent (53%) of them are in the age bracket of 21-30 years old,
twenty percent (20%) of them are of ages 31-40 years old, thirteen percent
(13%) of them are under 20 years old, ten percent (10%) goes to the
bracket of 41-50 years old and the remaining three percent (3%) are 51-60
years old. Also, the respondents status is equally distributed with a fifty
115
holder, and have same number of four (4) respondents on high school
forty percent (40%) of the respondents have 1-5 years in serve, thirty
percent (30%) has 5-10 years in service, twenty percent (20%) have 10-15
2. The level of conflict resolution style among staff and secretaries of legal
3.75 which means very often used. While, in terms of collaboration which
other side, civil status has two variables to reject the hypothesis which was
0.02. The F-test was also used to examine if there was significant
grouped according to their gender, age, civil status and length of service.
Conclusion
styles. Thus, they tend to use a combination of all five (5) conflict
resolution styles.
2. The demographic profile as to age, sex, civil status, and length of service
educational background and the civil status of the staff of legal offices in
Davao City. The two aforesaid styles are significantly related to their
Recommendation
assessment of the law offices conflict resolution styles. This will give the
2. The staff and secretaries of legal offices need to be aware not only of the
prospected benefits of the use of the given conflict resolution styles for
117
5. For the future researchers, they may enhance the data gathered in this
study to have more option in this kind of study in the future. A larger