Collectivist Values for Discussing and Integrating Opposing Views: An Experiment on Goal Interdependence in China

Abstract

Collectivist values have been thought to induce conflict avoidance but the evidence supporting this argument has been correlational. In an experiment with 80 participants in South China, protagonists with opposing views in organizations that valued collectivism, compared to individualism, were found to develop cooperative goals. They were also confident that they could work together and make decisions, sought to understand the opposing position by asking questions, demonstrated that they understood the opposing arguments, accepted these arguments as reasonable, and combined positions to create an integrated decision. The experiment also compared participants who valued harmony as a goal where they sought an agreement compared to those who valued harmony as a technique where they pretended to agree in order not to upset each other. However, these inductions were not successful. Results challenge traditional theorizing that collectivist values lead to conflict avoidance and support recent arguments that strong relationships promote the productive discussion of opposing views in decision-making.

Keywords: Collectivism and individualism, organizational values, decision making