Causal Accounts and Managing Organizational Conflict: Is It Enough to Say It's Not My Fault?

Abstract

People act in ways that sometimes violate social expectations or role requirements. To bridge the gap between action and expectation, and thus prevent conflict, the offending party can provide an account, which is an explanation of the behavior in question. This article examines situations in work organizations in which a boss refuses a subordinate's request, thus failing to meet the subordinate's expectations. Specifically, we examine the effects of a boss's causal account, which is an explanation claiming mitigating circumstances for the refusal, on subordinate reactions that might induce conflict (e.g., anger, complaints). In a survey of 121 currently employed subordinates, it was found that the mere claim of mitigating circumstances does not explain the influence of a causal account in lessening conflict; rather, it is the adequacy of reasoning in support of the claim and the boss's sincerity in communicating the causal account that explain the variance in subordinates' reactions. The implications of these results for an analysis of accounts as a conflict-management strategy are discussed.