Abstract
Individualism, hierarchy, polychronicity, and explicit-contracting values explain why managers from Germany, Japan, and the United States use a different mix of strategies to negotiate workplace conflict. Hypotheses extend prior research in showing that conflict behavior is multiply determined and that each culture uses a variety of interests, regulations, and power-based conflict management strategies. Results of actual (rather than survey-based) conflict resolution behavior suggest several fruitful avenues for future research, including examining the inferred meaning of negotiation arguments, analyzing interaction effects of cultural value dimensions, studying the effectiveness of different strategies across cultures, and examining whether strategic adjustments are made during intercultural conflict management.