CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research background
Among the African sojourners in Guangzhou, most are from Nigeria, which is the largest trading partner of China in West Africa. As the largest oil producer in Africa, Nigeria is economically influential among African countries, and as the most populous country of black people in the world, Nigeria is typical of African culture to a large extent. Therefore, choosing Nigeria as one of the research objects in the present study is reasonable. Moreover, it is found that conflicts between Nigerians and Chinese are not uncommon. For instance, in 2009, a Nigerian in Guangzhou attempted to escape from police investigation, but unfortunately fell from a building by accident and died. Subsequently, hundreds of African people gathered near the police station and confronted the policemen aggressively to express resentment, which was known as China’s most sensational mass disturbance from foreign sojourners since 1978 (Vifeng, 2009, translated by the author). In addition, in June 2012, a Nigerian fought with a Chinese electro-mobile driver for fare issue and unexpectedly died after he was brought into the police station. Consequently, a vast number of African people blocked the street to show their indignation (360 doc Personal Library, 2012, translated by the author). The intensity of conflicts between Nigerians and Chinese stimulates the present research to focus on analyzing Chinese and Nigerian businesspersons’ conflict management styles, even though many other alternative perspectives are also feasible. Conflict is a double-edged sword: positive or negative consequences depend on whether conflicting parties can manage it appropriately or not. The present study is expected to help promote favorable outcomes.
According to Gudykunst, communication can be divided into cross-cultural communication, which is to compare communication patterns across cultures, and intercultural communication, which involves “communication between people from different cultures” (Gudykunst, 2003:1). The study of conflict management styles is constantly highlighted in cross-cultural communication. In the field of cross-cultural conflict study, a majority of studies put an emphasis on the influence of cultural variability on conflict management styles, such as individualism-collectivism (Ting-Toomey et al, 1991; Chiu & Kosinski, 1994; Gabrielidis et al, 1997; Dsilva & Whyte, 1998; Morris et al, 1998; Kozan & Ergin, 1998; Ohbuchi et al, 1999; Ting-Toomey et al, 2000), power distance (Rahim & Buntzman, 1989; Smith et al, 1998), and self construal (Oetzel, 1998; Oetzel, 2001; Ting-Toomey et al, 2001). Most of the previous studies explore the relevance between culture and people’s preferences for conflict management styles by comparing the predominant conflict management styles of different cultures (Kozan, 1989; Ting-Toomey et al, 1991; Lee & Rogan, 1991; Buda & Elsayed-Ekhouly, 1996; Munduate et al, 1997; Kozan & Ergin, 1998; Mo
