Effects of approach to controversy on superiors' incorporation of subordinates' information in decision making

Abstract

36 experienced managers took the role of supervisors whose position was to eliminate job rotation. Workers' (3 male undergraduates) positions were that rotation should be retained. Supervisors approached this controversy cooperatively, competitively, or tried to smooth over differences and avoid controversy. Results indicate that supervisors who tried to avoid an open controversy did not explore or understand workers' arguments, but did think the arguments were reasonable and sometimes integrated them into their decisions. Supervisors in the competitive-controversy condition neither explored nor understood the workers' arguments, rejected their position, and made decisions that reflected only their own point of view. Supervisors in the cooperative-controversy condition explored, understood, accepted, and combined workers' arguments with their own to make a decision. It is concluded that controversy within a cooperative context can result in curiosity, understanding, incorporation, and an integrated decision. (10 ref) (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)