Formalization of conflict

Adler and Borys (1996) propose a typology that includes two contracting types of formalization: enabling and coercive. They define enabling formalization procedures provide organizational memory that captures learned from experience that provides employees with best practice templates and benefits of accumulated organizational learning. In contrast Coercive formalization is “designed to force reluctant compliance and to extract recalcitrant effort”.

In addition Michael and Wayne (2001) believes that enabling formalization recognizes that effective conflict has the potential to diminish performance and satisfaction while coercive formalization attempts either to control or ignore affective conflict because there is no place for conflict in this type of organization, it is neither recognized nor dealt with.