Chew 1995 Confucian Perspective on Conflict Resolution

The International Journal of Human Resource Management 6:1 February 1995

A Confucian perspective on conflictresolution

Irene K.H. Chew and Christopher Lim

Abstract

Chinese business managers, in general, have been portrayed as valuing har-mony and peace and having a tendency to avoid confrontation for fear of dis-turbing relationships involving mutual dependence. This is held to be areflection of traditional Confucian cultural values.

This paper is an exploratory study which attempts to establish the relation-ship between the traditional, C onfucian cultural values and the modes of con-flict resolution preferred by Chinese business managers. The Thomas-KilmannConflict Mode Instrument was employed in this study to describe the preferredconflict resolution modes of Chinese business managers. The results show thatcompromising tend to be the most preferred conflict resolution mode ofChinese business managers because of the latter's predominantly humanistic,Confucian self-concept.

However, other modes, that is, collaborating, competing, avoiding andaccommodating, are also being employed by Chinese business managers as astrategic and political variation of that Confucian self-concept.

Keywords

Confucian perspective, collectivism, conflict resolution, behaviour, harmony,business managers

Introduction

Confiict has been viewed by Cosier and Ruble (1981) as an overtbehaviour arising out of a process in which one party seeks theadvancement of its own interests in its relationship with the other. Insomewhat similar terms, Thomas (1975, 1977) has defined confiict as adynamic process which goes through a chain of behaviour, namely thelatest, perceived, affective/felt, manifest and aftermath stages of

0958-5192 © Routledge 1995


psychosomatic behaviour. As a result, perceptions of competing objec-tives emerge in the dynamic process. A conflict situation becomesmanifest and the competing parties engage in various forms of conflictbehaviour.

Conflict can be addressed through non-attention, suppression orattempt at resolution. Non-attention involves what it implies: there isno direct attempt to deal with manifest conflict. The conflict is left onits own to emerge as a constructive or destructive force. Suppressiondecreases the negative consequences of a conflict, but it does notaddress or eliminate root causes. It is a surface solution that allowsthe antecedent conditions constituting the original reasons for conflictto remain in place. Conflict resolution only occurs when the underly-ing reasons for a conflict are removed and no lingering conditions orantagonism are left to rekindle conflict in the future.

While there are obviously numerous potential determinants of con-flict behaviour, including non-cultural factors such as personality,organizational culture and the legal environment, our focus in thispaper is on the influence of culture.

This paper is an exploratory study which attempts to establish howcertain traditional values may affect preferred Chinese conflict-handling and resolution styles. The term 'Chinese' has ethnic connota-tions in this paper. It embraces the ethnic Chinese in Singapore andabroad.

The research context

There exists a large body of work on Chinese values in the philosoph-ical, scientiflc and psychological literature, including Needham's (1954to date) monumental work on the science and artefacts of the ancientcivilization of China. There has been a variety of empirical studiesincluding those by Lin (1911), Morris (1956), Robb (1959), Tseng(1973), Bond (1986), Frankenstein (1986), Garratt (1981), Pye (1986)and Lockett (1987). This paper focuses on those values and orienta-tions which seem to have signiflcance for conflict handling and resolu-tion. These values include certain Confucian values like (1)conformity, (2) collectivism, (3) large power distance, (4) harmony ininterpersonal relationships and (5) trustworthiness, which are stronglyemphasized in the Analects (see Lau's 1979 translation) within theChinese communities of the world.

Conformity is a central value in Chinese societies. It is related tothe key humanistic Confucian values of // and jen. Li refers to therules of propriety which structure interpersonal relationships into hier-

144

A Confucian perspective on conflict resolution

archical dualities. Individuals have to orient their behaviour to thoseinterpersonal relations and not change their role system in the envi-ronment. This role system is based on the concept of wu-lun whereroles and loyalties are prioritized in terms of the five basic social rela-tionships: the love and respect between father and son, the loyalty andduty between sovereign and subject, the affection between husbandand wife, the seniority of the old over the young and good faithbetween friends. Jen, the core Confucian concept, indicates the virtueof attaining a benevolent relationship between man and his followers,and it emphasizes the idea of a proactive, holistic man or humanbeing who is not isolated or divorced from the world (Redding, 1980).It is this value of human being that distinguishes Chinese society ascollectivist in comparison to the individualist Western societies(Hofstede, 1980).

The value of conformity and collective orientation make individualsconsider the relationship between themselves and other parties a cru-cial factor in a conflict situation. Thus, it is thought that the Chinesetend to avoid confrontation for fear of disturbing their relationshipsand mutual dependence. When the dispute is with a superior, it fol-lows, the person's natural deference to authority may lead the Chineseindividual to accommodate the superior's wishes. Also, as mostOriental societies are characterized by larger power distance betweenmanagers and their subordinates (Hofstede, 1980), it is natural forone to rationalize that the relative status and authority of the partiescan become a key issue in determining conflict behaviour. Here, it isthought that subordination is a result of power distance, hierarchicalrelationship and face. Because of the respect accorded to seniors andsocial etiquette, it is thought that the Chinese individual is bound togive 'face' to seniors and deference to the wishes of seniors may result(Hwang, 1987; Yang, 1987; Redding and Ng, 1982). In fact, one couldbe exposed to shame if respect for seniors is not practised. ButConfucius (see Lau, 1979: 85 Analects VI, 30 reinterpreted) thoughtotherwise, since he sees that there is always not much of a conflictbetween the ambition of the superior man of jen and those who areprovided assistance by the superior man:

Now a man ofjen or benevolence, wishing to be established himself, seeks alsoto establish others; wishing to turn his own merits to account, helps others toturn theirs to account as well . . .

In other words, the hierarchical level of relationship between superiorand subordinate is accepted as natural law.

The maintenance of proper relationships is not the only emphasisof Confucianist thought as Confucianism stresses the necessity of

145


keeping relationships in harmony and peace. Often, Chinese individu-als are asked to adapt themselves to collective society, control theirown emotions and avoid dissension, competition and conflict. TheConfucian terminology for peace, namely ho-ping, is a compound oftwo ideographs - harmony and equilibrium. As a result, Mencius (seeLau, 1970: 53, Mencius, Book 1, Part A:6 interpreted) recommendsthe use of empathy rather than physical force in order to bring unityamong the conflicting parties: 'Only he who abhors the taking of aman's life may bring about unification, harmony and progress.'

The willingness to develop a trust, hsin-yi, for others depends onsuch values as good faith and reciprocation. Confucius (see Lau,1979, Analects XII, 10) does not know how a man or human beingwithout good faith can get on in life. In terms of a whole society,Confucius (see Lau, 1979, Analects XII, 77) found that it is the trustthe people have in their government rather than the provision of foodto the people that formed the basis of good government. The govern-ment which strives to be people or yew-centred, according to Mencius'(see Lau, 1970, Mencius, Book VII: B14) contention, is not one thatbetrays the confidence the people have in the government. Otherwise,the people have the right to confront and overthrow a governmentwhich breaks the contract of good faith when it ceases to promotewelfare and good relationship among people.

Method

In order to explore the influence of possible Confucian values and dif-ferentiation in conflict-handling styles among the Chinese, a samplegroup was used in this study. This sample comprises thirty-threeCEOs (Chief Executive Officers) in private business organizationswhich cover a wide variety of industries: manufacturing, services,trading, construction, etc. These subjects are of the Chinese ethnicgroup and they reside in China, Taiwan, Indonesia and Singapore.They all completed their primary and secondary school education inMandarin. All subjects were participants in a management trainingcourse conducted by an institution of higher learning in Singapore.

Procedures

A questionnaire consisting of the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict ModeInstrument and a Confucian Value Questionnaire in Mandarin to bedescribed later were administered to respondents who participated in

146


the management course that was conducted for three sessions. Themanagement course had a total enrolment of 100 participants, that is,thirty participants in two sessions and forty participants in the lastsession. Out of the 100 participants, only thirty-three CEOsresponded. Several styles of conflict management were derived fromthe Thomas-Kilmann instrument and, from these styles, various inter-correlations via Pearson's r were made with the subscale scores of theConfucian Value Questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha was used to esti-mate the reliability of the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrumentand the Kuder-Richardson Formula 21 was used for the ConfucianValue Questionnaire. The two instruments yielded a respective relia-bility of 0.81 and 0.72.

Instruments and measures

For the first part of this study, the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict ModeInstrument was employed. This instrument classifies conflict behav-iours into five basic styles: namely competing, collaborating, compro-mising, avoiding and accommodating, depending on different degreesof assertiveness and co-operation (Thomas, 1975).

The competing style is assertive and uncooperative, a power-orientated mode used by managers who defend their positions at theexpense of other persons. The collaborating style is both assertive andco-operative, a team-orientated mode used by managers to solve prob-lems. The compromising style is one where managers exchange conces-sions and therefore it is middle-of-the road or intermediate inassertiveness or co-operativeness. The avoiding style is both unassertiveand uncooperative, a power-vacuum mode used by managers to side-step an issue or withdraw from a threatening situation. The accommo-dating style is unassertive but co-operative, a sacriflcial mode wherethe managers suppress their own concerns to satisfy the concerns ofothers.

There are thirty questions in the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict ModeInstrument. For each question, respondents are asked to select onesituation out of two that best describes their preferred behaviour;these are either-or situations such as:

A. I am usually firm in pursuing my goals. (Competing Style)B. I attempt to get all concerns and issues immediately out in the open.

(Collaborating Style)A. I attempt to immediately work through our differences. (Collaborating

Style)B. I try to find a fair combination of gains and losses for both of us.

(Compromising Style)

147


A. I sometimes avoid taking positions that would create controversy.(Avoiding Style)

B. If it makes the other person happy, I might let him maintain his views.(Accommodating Style)

The second part of the survey used the Confucian ValueQuestionnaire. Here certain Confucian cultural values and theirimportance were ranked in terms of (a) the Chinese business man-agers' own self-concept of Chinese values and (b) their perception ofvalues of other Chinese business managers. As indicated earlier, thesevalues include those core Confucian values of conformity, collec-tivism, power distance and status, harmony and trustworthiness. Thefirst subscale, the business managers' self-concept of values, relates totheir own prioritization of the usefulness of the aforesaid values inbusiness dealings. In other words, this subscale focuses on the per-sonal preferences and inner personality of the managers. The secondsubscale, the business managers' perception of values of other busi-ness managers, however, constitutes what the business managers per-ceive are the shared values of the Chinese business community andenvironment. This subscale therefore describes the managers' dynamicassessment of the external, global Chinese values that are demandedby their business colleagues and rivals in business dealings.

In an additional subscale of the Confucian Value Questionnaire,potential areas of disagreement in business were solicited in terms ofbenefits and profit sharing, company policies, differences in work atti-tudes, partners' attempts to alter terms of contract, interpretation ofterms of contracts and unreliable delivery dates. The scores on thissubscale include ratings on the frequency and seriousness of theseareas of disagreement.

Analysis and results

As shown below, the responses to the questions raised under theThomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument show that the compro-mising mode was most often used to handle conflicts:

Preferred conflict- Percentage ofhandling mode respondentsCompeting 18.00Collaborating 22.20Compromising 24.30Avoiding 19.30Accommodating 16.20

148


The collaborating mode seems to be preferred as well (this mode was2 per cent below the compromising mode). The avoiding mode wasnext on the list. Although the competing and accommodating modelswere not strongly favoured, their percentage share of the responsestend to be quite significant. The rank order of the conflict resolutionmodes of the Chinese business manager, however, is not surprising.The aim of Confucian traditional education has always been one thatis characterized by a love for moderation and restraint. That is thedoctrine of chung-yung which reminds us of the in medio stat virtus or'nothing too much' ideal of the Greeks. The dominant compromisingmode of the Chinese business manager, as such, can be associatedwith that kind of moderate chung-yung learning which specifies that'to go beyond is as wrong as to fall short' (see Lau,. 1979: 108,Analects XI, 16). But the Chinese approach to conflict managementmay venture even further than the reaches of chung-yung compromise.As the results show, other modes of conflict management were usedby the Chinese business managers as well. Using Confucian logic as itis propounded by the I-Ching (see Wilhelm's 1967 translation), allthese modes seem to represent eclectic, ying-yang variations on thecompromise approach (i.e. the soft-hard approach). Here the soft yinapproaches of avoidance and accommodation and the hard yangapproaches of collaboration and competition exist in a conflict man-agement continuum where there are no absolutes, only states of fluxof conflict modes that are relative to the diverse personality, valuesand rationality of the Chinese business managers.

Table 1 shows the intercorrelations of the respondents' own valueand their conflict-handling mode preferences. As can be seen in Table1, respondents who attached importance to collectivism were morelikely to use the compromising mode of handling conflicts.

Collectivism, rather than harmony as a personal value, has tendedto become the hallmark of this proactive compromise approach of theChinese business managers. Collectivism is the dominant Chinesebusiness managers' answer to the difficulties of practising the univer-sal golden rule of love, which, as stated in the Analects XII, 2 (seeFung, 1948: 43), runs as follows:

Do not do to others what you do not wish yourself. Do to others what youwish others to do to yourself.

A significant collectivism -> compromise correlation (r = 0.58, p <0.01), and not a significant conformity -^ collaboration or conformity—> avoidance correlation, has emerged to solve such moral dilemmasin business. This connection between collectivism and compromiseindicates that there is a kind of affinity in the Chinese for teamwork

149


I•I5

I

I§

I

I

o

J

I•2

8

I

I1I

II

o

VO oo

-H O<N

r

.— CO

aoc

oU

aoa

•ati

o

.2"oU

00c

Icaa

ao_c

•3'o><

00

tin

ca•§

i

J

pV

*

oVa*

150


and brotherhood, and this, as it is embodied in the Book of Rites(Legge, 1900/1965: 364-5), points to a Utopian vision of GreatBrotherhood (Ta-Tung) where:

The worthy, sincere and able were promoted to office and the people practicedgood faith and lived in good neighbourliness. These people worked hard toearn a living. They hated to see goods lying in waste, yet they did not hoardthem for themselves; they disliked the thought that their energies were notfully used, yet they used them not for private gains.

Compare the conflict mode correlations of those respondents who val-ued harmony. In the case of those respondents who valued harmony,both compromise and competition were likely to be used to resolveconflict. This implies that, even in competition, as it is embodied inSun Tzu's Art of War (see Giles, 1910: 17 translation), harmony ordiplomatic tactics may be desired in ultimate terms, for 'supreme excel-lence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting'.

Table 2 shows the intercorrelations of the respondents' perceptionof values held by Chinese business managers and the respondents'conflict-handling mode preferences. The assumptions of Table 2 aredifferent from that of Table 1 where the emerging conflict modesreflect the business managers' self-concept of traditional values. InTable 2, the intercorrelations, ceteris paribus, tend to be seen as repre-sentations of conflict modes that are modified by the Chinese businessmanagers' perception of others. As can be seen in Table 2, the avoid-ing mode (r = 0.74, p< 0.01) was predominantly used by respondentswho perceived collectivism to be valued by Chinese business man-agers. The collectivism -> avoiding stance recalls the logic of wu-wei(non-action or non-interference) in Taoist philosophy. The term wu-wei does not mean no-action that is contrary to the tao or goal-pathin which people reach their destination or objectives. In this case,those business managers who used the avoidance mode were not tak-ing a competitive stance to disrupt the status quo of other businessmanagers, whom they perceived to have a keen preference for a ta-tung collectivism and teamwork. In the other case of respondents whothought that Chinese business managers valued trustworthiness, itmay seem implausible that the competing mode (r = 0.56, p < 0.05)was used to resolve conflict. Apparently, it was the dark, hijacked sideof Confucianism that tended to be portrayed in this case. Here anumber of Chinese business managers seemed to have applied thecompeting mode to exploit or betray whatever trust or good faiththey think others have on them. They were probably the competingxiao-jen (petty Machiavellian men and women), who, living in theirown world that was devoid of compromise, believed in the law of thejungle and the survival of the fittest.

151


J

II

•I

S-Ci

-5

•2

I

I 8 sSi ^

^ §at st

II

=5I

I

vo >o o^ u^ so>/ fS ro <N O

Tt — OO —' u-1f ^t C^ C^ f*

oo o —< tro Tt Tt (N

s •o t f^

o t o

O - Ov <N —m — r-4 o <N

&0bO C

OO c —

60 -3

S 2

c = E oo o o >U U U <

^B

oVa

oV

152


Intercorrelations of the possible areas of disagreement and therespondents' conflict-handling mode preferences are indicated in Table3. Respondents who preferred the accommodating rather than thecompromise or collaboration modes of conflict, as expected, experi-enced the least disagreements and these relate to policies (r = 0.46, p< 0.05) and differences in work attitudes (r = - 0.45, p < 0.05). As forrespondents who preferred the avoiding modes, they seldom experi-enced differences resulting from differences from unreliable dates(r = - 0.43, p < 0.05) since they tended to be less affected by suchunreliability.

Although the sample size was not large and exploratory in thisstudy, the authors are of the opinion that the aforesaid signiflcantresults indicate that there are important culturological findings to bemade about the conflict management modes of Chinese business man-agers. It is not, however, the intention of this paper to study all therelationships and ramifications of Confucian culture and conflict man-agement. Rather, the authors are able to summarize from this researchthe basic influence of Confucian values on conflict management.

Discussion and summary

It is the Confucian concept of collectivism, that is of self as a centreof ever-widening relations embodying family, society, nation andbeing-with-others in the universe, that has created a social pressurefor Chinese business to be less openly aggressive and emotional inconflict situations. Such a concept of collectivism, as shown in thisstudy, naturally leads to the possession of high compromising andavoiding styles and relatively lower preference for competing behav-iour.

The influence and operation of conformity, power distance, har-mony and trustworthiness are most complicated. The correlationsbetween the various conflict modes and the Confucian values of con-formity and power distance tend to be non-significant and inexplica-ble. They are inexplicable, perhaps, in the sense that the conflictmodes of the Chinese business managers do not quite corroborate theconformity -> accommodating and power distance -^ competing para-digms of the democratic system. A reasonable explanation for suchnon-significant correlations, however, lies in the fact that conformityand power distance are taken for granted by Chinese business as nat-ural laws of socialization whereas, in the democratic Aristotelian sense(see Sinclair, 1981: 181, Aristotle: The Politics, III iv, 1277 a33-b7),these same values may be critical, bargainable rule-of-law concerns:

153


1

!

III

II

a..?i

II

I

I5

I

Ia

III

in « « oO O (N —

t3 82 a

I 'O au O

154


For there is such a thing as rule by a master, which we say is concerned withnecessary tasks: but the master has no necessity to know more than how to usesuch labour. Anything else, I mean to be able actually to be a servant and todo the chores, is simply slave-like. . . . But there is another kind of rule - thatexercised over men who are free, and similar in birth. This we call rule by astatesman.

Though ironical, the humanistic values of harmony and trustworthi-ness can, among other things, be associated with the competing modeof Chinese business managers. Here, the latter mode can be practisedas a utilitarian form of legalism to ensure peace and harmony amongthe conflicting parties or, alternatively, as a malevolent form of utili-tarianism to exploit the trust and good faith of other business man-agers.

The Chinese business managers' form of conflict management canbe likened to the changing colours of the chameleon. According to thefindings of this research, several forms were utilized on different occa-sions but these styles also reflected an explanation of thinking that ischaracteristically Confucian. The following are some possibleConfucian logic or managerial justifications that support the conflictresponses of Chinese business managers:

7. Reframing as a locus of thinking The compromise approachtends to be the dominant Chinese business managers' tactic to reframeor neutralize any unfavourable outcome that may arise from a conflictsituation. Apparently, the internal locus of thinking of the Chinesemanager is that: To get something, one must give first. This is a well-known compromise tactic that may be employed by many Chinesebusiness managers when they negotiate to market their goods and ser-vices. That tactics are a product of reciprocal determination whenevertwo or more parties are involved in a conflict situation.

2. Postponement motives as external locus In order to respond toanother party or business competitor in a conflict situation, theChinese manager should be able to extricate himself from difficultiesby avoiding a confrontation with his opponent. The Chinese managershould be able to modify and postpone his or her plans to suit chang-ing circumstances in order to achieve the best results. The externallocus of thinking of the Chinese business manager is opportunist andrecalls the Art of War as it is propounded by Sun Tzu (see Giles,1910): Know your opponent and know yourself. If you are unsure aboutnature and the situation, do not force a triumph. Those who can wait,and can follow the opponent's transformations and then triumph whenthe iron is hot, can be called genius.

3. Receptivity as an exonerative action In order to absolve himselfor herself from being labelled as uncooperative in a conflict situation,

155


the Chinese business manager must be able to empathize with theview of his or her business opponents. The logic of the Chinese man-ager tends to be as follows: Whenever one yields, resistance becomesless. If one becomes more sympathetic and accommodates the needs ofour opponents, they become more forthcoming. This prevents the escala-tion of conflict. If however one does not know how to exercise authorityor is overly solicitous to the needs of the opponent, the conflict will endup as a lose-win situation. The idea is to be receptive and at the sametime exercise restraint in one's accommodation.

As it is used in this paper, the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict ModeInstrument has been a useful construct in deciphering Chinese conflictmanagement style. Yet, as a self-report instrument it can measureonly reported preferences and not actual conflict behaviour. It followsthat more qualitative research and content interviews have to be con-ducted to map out the actual conflict behaviour of Chinese businessmanagers if more cross-cultural learning in conflict behaviour is to beunravelled.

Irene K.H. ChewSchool of Accountancy and Business

Nanyang Technological UniversityChristopher Lim

Nanyang PolytechnicSchool of Business Management

Singapore

References

Bond, M.H. (ed.) (1986) The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong:Oxford University Press.

Cosier, R.A. and Ruble, T.L. (1981) 'Research on Conflict-Handling Behaviour:An Experimental Approach', Academy of Management Journal, 24: 816-32.

Frankenstein, J. (1986) 'Trends in Chinese Business Practice: Changes in theBeijing Wind', California Management Review, 29(1): 148-60.

Fung, Y.L. (1948) A Short History of Chinese Philosophy. New York: Macmillan.Garratt, ? (1981) 'Contrasts in Chinese and Western Management Thinking'

LODJ, 2(1).Giles, L. (1910) Sun Tzu on the Art of War. Singapore: Graham Brash.Hofstede, G. (1980) 'Motivation, Leadership, and Organization: Do American

Theories Apply Abroad?', Organizational Dynamics, Summer.Hwang, K.K. (1987) 'Face and Favour: The Chinese Power Game', American

Journal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-74.Lau, D.C. (trans.) (1970) Mencius. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

156


Lau, D.C. (trans.) (1979) The Anatects. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Legge, J. (trans.)/Muller, F.M. (ed.) (1900/1965) The Sacred Books of the East, W.

27, Pt III. Delhi: Montilal Banarsidass.Lin, Y.T. (1911) My Country and My Peopte. Hong Kong: Heinemann.Lockett, M. (1987) 'China's Special Economic Fares: The Cultural and

Managerial Challenges', Journat of Generat Management, 12(3): 21-31.Morris, C.W. (1956) Varieties of Human Vatues. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.Needham, J. (1954-date) Science and Civitization in China. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.Pye, L. (1986) Chinese Commercial Negotiating Styles. New York: Oelgeschlager,

Gunn & Hain.Redding, S.G. (1980) 'Cognition as an Aspect of Culture and its Relation to

Management Processes: An Exploratory View of the Chinese Case', Journal ofManagement Studies, 17: 127-48.

Redding, S.G. and Casey, T. (1976) 'Managerial Beliefs among Asian Managers',Academy of Management Proceedings, 351-5.

Redding, S.G. and Ng, M. (1982) 'The Role of "Face" in the OrganisationalPerceptions of Chinese Managers', Organisational Studies, 3(3): 201-19.

Robb, W.G. (1959) 'Cross-cultural Use of the Study of Values', Psychologia, 2:157-64.

Sinclair, T.A. (trans.)/Saunders, T.J. (rev.) (1981) Aristotle: The Politics.Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Thomas, K. (1975) 'Conflict and Conflict Management'. In Dunnette, M. (ed.)Handbook of Industrial and Organisational Psychology. Chicago: RandMcNally.

Thomas, K.W. (1977) 'Towards Multidimensional Values in Teaching: TheExample of Conflict Management', Academy of Management Review, 2.

Tseng, W.S. (1973) 'The Concept of Personality in Confucian Thought',Psychiatry, 36: 191-202.

Wilhem, R. (trans.)/Baynes, C.F. (trans, into English) (1967) The I-Ching or Bookof Changes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Yang, K.S. (1986) 'Chinese Personality and Its Change'. In Bond, M.H. (ed.) ThePsychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Yang, L.S. (1957) 'The Concept of Pao as a Basis for Social Relations in China'In Fairbank, J.K. (ed.) Chinese Thought and Institutions. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, pp. 291-9.

157

Chew 1995 Confucian Perspective on Conflict Resolution

Documents

Transcript of Chew 1995 Confucian Perspective on Conflict Resolution