Search results

The usage of augmented reality (AR) in online shopping websites provides a “try-on” experience for consumers. AR technology combines the virtual and real world. Previous studies have addressed AR usage’s benefits to consumers’ online shopping experience. However, this study aims to explore the dark side of AR usage in consumers’ online purchasing process.

The authors conduct six experiments to examine whether AR usage leads to adverse effects on consumers’ purchase intention and explain the mechanism of its dark side.

The result shows that AR usage in online shopping websites reduces consumers’ purchase intention. The authors further reveal that the usage of AR leads to more vital psychological ownership of the product, and psychological ownership positively relates to cognitive conflict. Cognitive conflict explains the negative influence of AR usage on purchase intention.

First, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore the impact of embedded AR function of websites on consumers’ decision-making process. Also, it is the first study on the application of AR in a real shopping scene, which makes the study of AR close to reality. Second, psychological ownership is introduced in this study. Although there are many types of research on psychological ownership, few scholars have explored it in AR research. Third, most studies stress the advantages of using AR during purchase; this research demonstrates that embedding AR function in a shopping website may negatively affect purchase intention.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between three conflict types, cognitive task conflict, emotional relationship conflict and emotional task conflict, and team effectiveness (team performance and team job satisfaction).

The authors conducted a group-level ordinary least square regression analysis of 61 working teams to investigate the study variables, and possible interaction effects among them. In an auxiliary analysis (36 teams), they analyzed the role of mood dimensions (hedonic valence and general conflict activation) as mediators to the relationship between cognitive task conflict and team effectiveness.

Cognitive task conflict was negatively related to team performance, emotional relationship conflict was negatively related to team job satisfaction and emotional task conflict was positively related to team performance, all controlled for the effect of each other. The relationship between cognitive task conflict and team job satisfaction was negatively moderated by team size. Mood valence mediated the relationship between cognitive task conflict and team performance, and between cognitive task conflict and team job satisfaction.

Several possible research lines emanate from the current field study. First of all, the authors suggest that emotional task conflict may be of particular interest, as this is hypothesized and found to be incrementally positively related to team performance. Second, their auxiliary study of the mediating effect of mood valence on the relationship between cognitive task conflict and performance may spur curiosity concerning the role of mood as a mediator of the relationship between task or cognitive conflicts and team effectiveness.

The practitioner should be advised to try to facilitate the distribution of intragroup conflict in their teams in the direction of an increased level of emotional task conflict (positive for performance) at the expense of cognitive task conflict (negative for performance) and emotional relationship conflict (negative for satisfaction). The practitioner should allow intragroup conflicts to be highly activated (intense), as long as the interactions are strictly directed to the task in hand, and not being personal. In addition, a positive mood in teams may significantly strengthen the team's resilience against adverse consequences of conflicts.

The three conflict types in this three-dimensional intragroup conflict model (3IC) have never been tested before, and the findings open for a conflict type – emotional task conflict – that may generally be conducive for the teams’ performance, evaluated by the teams’ supervisors. This is a conflict type where people simultaneously are emotional and yet task oriented. To the authors’ knowledge, this is a novelty, and they hope that it may encourage further research on this conflict type.

Teamwork is important for innovation, but it often incurs conflicts. Previous literature has reported inconsistent relationships between conflicts and team performance. The purpose of this paper is to clarify this relationship and explore how to improve team innovation using conflict management styles.

This study collects data in China and the survey covering 436 participants from 126 project teams. Then, structure equation model by AMOS and moderated regression analyses are used for hypotheses testing.

This study finds that cognitive conflict and affective conflict have positive and negative effects on team innovation separately, and cognitive conflict positively affects affective conflict, with the total effect of cognitive conflict on team innovation being negative. Moreover, this study suggests that cooperative conflict management styles and dominating style (one of competitive conflict management styles) moderate the relationship between cognitive conflict and affective conflict negatively and positively.

First, this study did not consider features of organizations as control variables. Future research can advance in this direction. Second, the data were collected from a single marketing innovation program. Further research might use more diversified teams to test the hypotheses.

Firms should realize that cognitive conflict promotes team innovation directly, but it also harms team innovation through affective conflict. Then, cooperative conflict management styles are effective in weakening the relationship between cognitive conflict and affective conflict.

This study fulfills an identified need to clarify the relationship between conflict and team performance, as well as how conflict management styles moderating the relationship between cognitive conflict and affective conflict.

Research on strategic decision making has over‐emphasized the importance of cognitive conflict because of its potential benefits. Recent research documented that, apart from the benefits, cognitive conflict leads to affective conflict. Taking information processing perspective, the present study seeks to argue that the benefits of cognitive conflict can be stimulated by the cognition‐based trust, while the interplay between cognitive conflict and affective conflict can be influenced by affect‐based trust. The present study therefore aims to demonstrate the divergent roles of the perceived trustworthiness as potential moderators in strategic decision‐making teams.

Using structured survey instrument, multi‐informant data was collected from CEOs and senior executives of 109 US hospitals. After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data was analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to analyze divergent roles of cognition‐ and affect‐based trust as moderators in the relationship between conflict and decision outcomes.

Results showed that cognition‐based trust is the key to fortify the benefits of cognitive conflict while affect‐based trust is the panacea for the ills of cognitive conflict.

The sample consisted of hospitals in healthcare industry only. Self‐report measures may have some inherent social desirability bias.

This study contributes to both practicing managers as well as to strategic management literature. This study suggests that trust between the executives involved in strategic decision‐making process plays an important role in enhancing decision quality. It is therefore suggested that CEOs and administrators engage the executives who have both cognition‐ and affect‐based trust with each other to have successful decision outcomes.

Though the sample in the present study focuses only on healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decision‐making process is similar in other industries, the findings can be generalizable across other industries.

Past research on strategic decision making has emphasized the influence of cognitive conflict and affective conflict on the decision outcomes. Early researchers demonstrated that affective conflict has negative outcomes whereas cognitive conflict has positive outcomes. While the negative outcomes of affective conflict remain non‐controversial, the positive outcomes of cognitive conflict are not always consistent. The research on the outcomes of cognitive conflict is perplexedly mixed. Taking an information processing perspective, the present study aims to examine the relationship between cognitive conflict on decision outcomes, while controlling for affective conflict.

The authors surveyed 109 hospitals in the USA and collected data from top management teams (CEOs and senior executives). After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data were analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to examine the curvilinear relationships between cognitive conflict among the teams and its influence on decision quality and decision understanding.

Analysis of team data supports the hypotheses that there exists curvilinear (inverted‐U shaped) relationship between cognitive conflict and decision quality, and between cognitive conflict and decision commitment.

Since the data were collected from self‐report measures, limitations of social desirability bias may be inherent.

Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between cognitive conflict and decision outcomes extends to the existing strategic management literature. Further, the findings from this study are particularly useful for practicing managers. This study suggests that CEO and team members need not overemphasize cognitive conflict beyond a limit because it may have deleterious consequences. The findings reveal that a moderate level of cognitive conflict, instead of too much conflict, is always desirable.

Though the sample in the present study focuses only on the healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decision making process is similar in other industries, the findings can be generalizable across other industries.

The aim of this paper is to present a model of the moderating role of emotional self-leadership on the cognitive conflict–affective conflict relationship and their effect on work team decision quality.

This paper draws upon extant theoretical and empirical research on the conflict, leadership and emotions literature works to argue for the role of emotional self-leadership as a boundary condition of the intra-team conflict–work team decision quality relationship.

Key to understanding why cognitive conflict sometimes leads to improved decision quality and sometimes it does not is the role of emotional self-leadership. Through emotional self-leadership, team members can actively anticipate, guide and focus their emotional responses to cognitive conflict and reduce their experience of affective conflict, improving team decision quality.

Identifying and explaining the moderating role of emotional self-leadership represents important progress for reframing emotion regulation and emotional intelligence into a new theoretical lens that may yield more meaningful insights into self-managed teams’ research. If empirically supported, this moderating effect would help explain the contradictory results obtained in prior empirical studies.

Practitioners can diminish or avoid the negative effect of the type of conflict that lowers work team decision quality and preserve the positive effect of the type of conflict that improves work team decision quality by identifying and implementing ways to improve a work team’s level of collective emotional self-leadership.

This paper extends the emotions, leadership and conflict literature works into the current research on self-directed work teams’ effectiveness by bringing attention to the moderating role of emotional self-leadership and calls for empirical research on this subject.

The purpose of this study is to verify whether digital transformation strategy (DTS) could improve the organizational performance and provide a comprehensive analysis for enterprises on the necessity of implementing digital transformation in the context of China and draw on the perspectives of “Skewed conflict,” “minority dissent theory” and “too-much-of-a-good-thing.” This study investigates the curvilinear moderating role of cognitive conflict between DTS and performance.

An empirical investigation was used to collect a large sample data of Chinese enterprises’ digital transformation. A multiple linear regression analysis with SPSS was used to test the proposed hypotheses such as the inverted U-shaped moderating effect of the cognitive conflict.

In the Chinese context, DTS has a positive relationship on the short- and long-term financial performance. Moreover, this relationship was moderated by cognitive conflict such that the relationship between DTS and short-term financial performance could be further enhanced under the moderate cognitive conflict; however, the relationship between DTS and long-term financial performance was considerably influenced for higher cognitive conflict.

Based on the co-evolution of the information technology/information system (IT/IS) and business strategy, this study clarified the relationships among DTS, digital strategy and business and information technology strategies. By focusing on corporate strategy, this study further examined the effect of digital transformation on both short- and long-term financial performance. To further reveal the micro-psychological mechanisms underlying the effect of DTS on organizational performance, this study confirmed the inverted U-shaped moderating effect of the top management team’s cognitive conflict. Therefore, this research provides a new theoretical perspective for future research in the field of IT/IS, DTS and digital strategy.

This research aims to comprehensively investigate when and how cognitive conflict benefits team innovation in cross-functional project teams (CFPTs), by exploring the moderating role of knowledge leadership and dual mediation mechanisms of elaboration of task-related information/knowledge and affective conflict.

All hypotheses have been empirically tested by using structural equation model to analyze the quantitative data from a questionnaire survey covering 73 CFPTs in China.

Results indicate that knowledge leadership positively moderates the relationship between cognitive conflict and CFPT innovation. This moderating effect is directly or indirectly revealed by the dual mediating roles of task-related information/knowledge elaboration and affective conflict, which are two processes manifesting whether cognitive conflict can or cannot be incorporated into team innovation.

Despite the external validity of results limited by convenient sampling method, the findings offer implications for promoting CFPT innovation. This can be achieved by developing competent knowledge leadership into team sensegiver, dissent reconciler and facilitator to accentuate benefits of cognitive conflict in information/knowledge elaboration and attenuate the likelihood of escalating to affective conflict.

This study advances the understanding of why cognitive conflict has an equivocal effect on team innovation in the context of CFPT by originally revealing how leaders’ role in information/knowledge management acts as a contingency and suggesting the dual mediating mechanisms that reflect the contingent impact. Project-based teams or organizations, characterized by cognitive clashes, can enhance innovation performance by shaping the meaningfulness of information/knowledge activities triggered by cognitive conflict.

This paper aims to investigate the influence of cognitive style diversity on intra-group relationship conflict and individual-level organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). The role of leader-member exchange as a moderating variable is also examined.

The authors used hierarchical linear modeling and hierarchical regression analysis to analyze results from a sample of 344 members from 83 teams nested within 126 departments in six manufacturing organizations in the People’s Republic of China.

Results yielded general support for our hypothesized relationships between cognitive style diversity and intra-group relationship conflict. Leader-member exchange was also found to moderate the relationship between these two variables. Contrary to expectations, there were no relationships between these variables and individual-level organizational citizenship behaviors.

This research addresses calls from the team diversity and conflict literature to address the understudied area of deep-level cognitive diversity. Second, this study addresses previous calls for more team-level and mixed-level theory and methodology to inform OCB research. Third, this is the first study of group-level cognitive style diversity and the moderating influence of leader-member-exchange and provides valuable insights into ways of mitigating some of the negative effects of cognitive diversity on teams.

The purpose of this study is to develop and empirically explore a model of four intra‐group conflict types (the 4IC model), consisting of an emotional person, a cognitive task, an emotional task, and a cognitive person conflict. The first two conflict types are similar to existing conceptualizations, whereas the latter two represent new dimensions of group conflict.

Based on a heuristic distinction between cognition and emotion, the four conflict types are defined, and scales for measuring them are developed. The psychometric and statistical properties of the scales were analyzed by data collected from four company samples and two student samples (n=208). The validity of the constructs was evaluated by comparing them with similar constructs, in particular, the Intra‐group Conflict Scale (ICS), developed.

A theory‐driven exploratory factor analysis elicited a 19‐item structure of four reliable factors, representing the four conflict types. A confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated satisfactory properties of the data matrix compared with the proposed model. Furthermore, a refined 12‐item scale was developed to consider the validity of the 4IC, with reasonably satisfactory findings.

Limitations concerning sample size, wording of items, the demarcation between conflict types and conflict approaches, and the robustness of the constructs are discussed. It is suggested that researchers may find the model useful for future studies of conflict in groups.

The model may be of assistance in handling conflicts in organizations. In particular, managers and employees may become aware that emotional conflicts are not always associated with relational or person‐oriented issues; they may as well concern task‐oriented issues. Furthermore, cognitive conflicts do not always have to be task‐oriented; they may also concern relational or person‐oriented issues. The introduction of the emotional task‐oriented and the cognitive person‐oriented conflict types may thus extend the conflict management toolbox for managers and employees.

The results of the study challenge common use of emotional and relationship/person conflicts as interchangeable conflict types, and cognitive and task conflict as interchangeable conflict types. Accordingly, the study suggests new ways to understand conflicts in groups.