Events

Mr. Kian Siong Tey
Ph.D. Candidate
INSEAD

Disputes between group representatives are both common and difficult to resolve. Although the dispute resolution literature suggests that such disputes can be resolved when third parties intervene, it does not offer evidence-based strategies for how to manage salient group identities. This is a critical void because these disputes involve very salient group identities. The social identity literature on the other hand, suggests that simultaneously activating subgroup and superordinate identities (“dual identity”) can mitigate intergroup bias and improve relations. However, this research leaves it unclear whether and how these insights can be leveraged by third parties mediating disputes because they predominantly examined hypothetical or mild conflict settings. Integrating insights from both literatures, we propose that third parties leveraging “dual-identity mediation” (DIM) are more successful in resolving disputes because DIM helps each representative understand how their subgroup identities can co-exist within a shared superordinate identity. We test these predictions in three studies of competitive negotiations and hostile disputes. Our studies show that compared to widely used alternative interventions or no third-party intervention, DIM produces (a) better economic outcomes (Studies 1 and 2), (b) better relational outcomes and (c) more positive evaluations of the outcome and the third party (Studies 1 and 2). However, we also find that DIM no longer offers these benefits when one group’s identity is more prototypical of the superordinate identity than the other group’s identity (Study 2).