ROCI II & its use in ENACT
The Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory–II (ROCI–II) measures the 5 conflict management styles (integrating, avoiding, dominating, obliging, and compromising) identified by Rahim.
It consist of 28 statements on a 5–point Likert scale measuring five independent dimensions of the styles of handling interpersonal conflict: 7 statements for Integrating (IN), 6 statements for Obliging (OB), 5 statements for Dominating (DO), 6 statements for Avoiding (AV), and 4 statements for Compromising (CO). The instrument contains Forms A, B, and C to measure how an organizational member handles conflict with supervisor, subordinates, and peers, respectively. The subscales have adequate reliability and validity
A higher score represents greater use of a conflict style.
Sample items of the instrument are reported as follows:
(Integrating): I try to investigate an issue with my supervisor/subordinates/peers to find a solution acceptable to us.
(Obliging): I generally try to satisfy the needs of my supervisor/subordinates/peers.
(Dominating): I use my influence to get my ideas accepted.
(Avoiding): I attempt to avoid being “put on the spot” and try to keep my conflict with my supervisor/subordinates/peers to myself.
(Compromising): I try to find a middle course to resolve an impasse.
A summary of the 5 styles of handling conflicts is reported below:
- 1. Integrating: expression of high concern for self as well as the other party involved
in the conflict. It involves collaboration between parties to reach a solution.
- 2. Obliging: involves of low concern for self and high concern for the other party involved in the conflict. It is expression of attempts to play down the differences and emphasise the commonalities to satisfy the other party.
- 3. Dominating: involves high concern for self and low concern for the other party. It is a I win- you lose orientation and forces behaviour to affirm one’s position.
- 4. Avoiding: involves low concern for self as well as the other party. It is associated with withdrawal, attribution of responsibility for one's own actions to others (passing-the-buck), sidestepping, ignoring of undesirable information (“see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil”)
- 5. Compromising
The ROCI–II it is not an evaluative tests of intelligence or behavioural skills. It is brief which can be administered in 8 minutes. It is self-administering (directions for completion are written on the questionnaire), and must be taken individually.
With the ENACT game we aim to obtain the same information provided by the administration of the ROCI II, as well as investigate if there are any relationships between the scores form the questionnaire about the different styles and the styles used by the user during the interaction with the BOT.
With the ENACT game at the end of the scenario the user can get an assessment of the preferred styles used during the negotiation process based on the description of the 5 styles provided by Rahim.
Full description of all ROCI II psychometrics are available in:
Rahim, A. & Magner, N. (1995). Confirmatory factor analysis of the styles of handling
interpersonal conflict: first-order factor model and its invariance across groups.
Journal of Applied Pyschology, 80(1), 122-132.
Weider-Hatfield, D. (1988) Assessing the Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory-II
(ROCI-II). Management Communication Quarterly, 1(3), 351.
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported. A summary of the license term is available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/