Search results

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.

This study aims to examine how and when task and process conflicts relate to relationship conflict by detailing the mediating role of negative emotions and the moderating effect of emotional intelligence.

Survey data were collected from 462 employees working in different organizations in Pakistan.

The results revealed that individuals engaged in task and process conflicts are more likely to feel negative emotions toward others and consequently are more likely to engage in relationship conflict in the workplace. This mediated relationship of task and process conflicts with relationship conflict via negative emotions is lower when employees are more emotionally intelligent.

This study pinpointed a key mechanism, negative emotions, by which task and process conflicts lead to relationship conflict. Emotionally intelligent individuals are better at regulating their negative emotions; therefore, emotional intelligence training can be an effective tool for minimizing employees’ negative emotions during task and process conflicts, which can help reduce relationship conflict.

By examining the mediating role of negative emotions and the moderating effect of emotional intelligence, this study adds to the previous research by detailing how and when task and process conflicts lead to relationship conflict.

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.

The purpose of this study is to examine and compare the effects of emotional and task conflict on team performance and member satisfaction in two distinct cultures, Brazil and The Netherlands.

A survey with 366 team members and interviews with 20 team managers were conducted. To analyse data and test the proposed hypotheses, hierarchical regression analyses were used.

Findings suggest that cultural differences between these two countries not only influence the way intragroup conflict is experienced, but also its impact on members' satisfaction and group performance. In Brazil, emotional and task conflict were both negatively associated with individuals' satisfaction and perceived team performance, while in The Netherlands no significant relationships were found between both types of conflict and team performance.

Several limitations of this research must be recognized: the use of self‐report measures that may have some inherent social desirability bias; and the use of linear regressions to test relationships that may be non‐linear.

This paper shows that managers need to focus on differentiating emotional and task conflict and find ways to seize the potential of task‐related conflicts.

The paper sheds light on how culture influences intragroup conflict and its impact on team outcomes, enlightening the role of cultural context in conflict research.

This study investigates the benefits and detriments of emotional and task‐related conflict in work groups. Group value consensus (GVC), or the extent to which group members share values, and group value fit (GVF), or the degree to which the culture of the group matches the ideal culture envisioned by external parties with control over the group, are hypothesized to decrease conflict. In examining 88 workgroups performing comparable organizational tasks, it was found that groups with low levels of value similarity among members and between the group and governing superiors had higher levels of conflict than groups with high levels of value similarity. As hypothesized, emotional conflict was negatively associated with group performance and satisfaction, while task conflict was positively associated with group performance. The implications of these results for conflict management and group effectiveness are discussed.

This paper aims to enhance clarity for the conceptualization and measurement of group emotional awareness by defining it as an emergent state. The authors explore the emergence of this state through two studies designed to explore the four characteristics (global, radically novel, coherent and ostensive) of emergent phenomena (Waller et al., 2016).

In Study 1, the authors explore in an experimental setting the formation of group emotional awareness and regulation as emergent states as a result of compositional effects (team members’ self-perceptions of their individual emotional awareness capabilities) and group norms regarding emotional awareness. Study 2 uses an experimental design to explore how pre-existing expectations of group emotional awareness, based on previous dyadic interactions between team members, can prevent conflict escalation (from task to relationship conflict) in project teams.

Individual perceptions of members’ own abilities and group norms interact in the emergence of group emotional awareness. Group emotion regulation can develop only under an optimal level of emergent group emotional awareness; groups that build emotional awareness norms compensate for their members’ low awareness and develop equally efficient regulatory strategies as groups formed of emotionally aware individuals. However, the conjunction of personal propensity towards awareness and explicit awareness norms blocks the development of regulatory strategies. Group emotional awareness (both as a developed state and as an expectation) reduces the escalation of task to relationship conflict.

Designing for the exploration of the four characteristics of emergence allowed us to gain new insights about how group emotional awareness emerges and operates too much awareness can hurt, and affective group expectations have the power to shape reality. These findings have strong implications for practitioners’ training of emotional awareness in organizations.

The overall purpose of this research is to increase understanding of the factors that promote the effective use of simulations in management education.

This study uses data from 49 teams of respondents performing a management simulation exercise to achieve the research purpose. Respondents took part in the simulation in teams and were required to manage a business in the global athletic industry. Respondents completed a 21‐item instrument designed to assess individual learning. Learning was factor‐analyzed and three factors derived that correspond to problem‐solving skills, teamwork and seeing oneself as a manager. Measures were developed to assess team dynamic factors (emotional and task conflict), the user‐friendliness and realism of the simulation.

The study showed that the nature of the simulation and team dynamics affected learning and performance. First, the extent to which users perceived the simulation as reflective of real life situations was positively associated with learning. Second, the ease of use of the simulation positively affected learning. Third, emotional conflict in the team was negatively associated with learning. Fourth, task conflict, measured by the degree of exchange of ideas, was positively associated with learning. Finally, the ease of use and task conflict in a team positively affected team performance, while emotional conflict had a negative relationship to team performance.

The research had some limitations. Reliance was placed on cross‐sectional data and a snapshot measure taken of performance and learning. In addition, respondents had fairly limited work experience and that may affect their perception of the simulation. This research can be extended by testing the model with managers with substantial years of experience. Including the role of game administrators may also yield greater insight.

The study demonstrated that carefully choosing simulations could affect their effectiveness. The user‐friendliness and realism of the simulation are two important criteria. In addition, the findings indicate that those administering simulations with teams should pay attention to team dynamics. The findings also suggest that factors that affect individual learning may not necessarily affect performance on the simulation. This implies that game administrators need to define their objectives clearly.

This study has increased understanding of the factors that determine the effectiveness of management simulations. The present research bridged some of the gaps in one's understanding by proposing and empirically testing factors that may lead to the identification of suitable management simulations. It also increased understanding of the situational dynamics that enhance the effective use of simulations. This study, as far is known, is the first to separate learning and performance as outcomes.

The lack of a clear conceptualization and operationalization of the construct of interpersonal conflict makes it difficult to compare the results of different studies and hinders the accumulation of knowledge in the conflict domain. Defining interpersonal conflict as a dynamic process that occurs between interdependent parties as they experience negative emotional reactions to perceived disagreements and interference with the attainment of their goals, the present paper presents a two‐dimensional framework and a typology of interpersonal conflict that incorporates previous conceptualizations of the construct. The first dimension of the framework identifies three properties generally associated with conflict situations: disagreement, negative emotion, and interference. The framework's second dimension identifies two targets of interpersonal conflict encountered in organizational settings: task and interpersonal relationship. Based on this framework, the paper highlights several shortcomings of current conceptualizations and operationalizations of interpersonal conflict in the organizational literature, and provides suggestions for their remedy.

In this chapter we apply intergroup emotion theory (IET; Mackie, Devos, & Smith, 2000) to reflect on the conditions under which individuals may experience intergroup emotions in workgroups, and to explore some possible consequences of those emotions. First, we briefly outline IET and describe the psychological mechanisms underlying intergroup emotion with a particular emphasis on the role of social identification. Second, we describe some of the antecedents of shared and varied social identifications in workgroups, which may in turn elicit shared or varied intergroup emotions in workgroups. Finally, we consider potential consequences for both relationship and task outcomes such as organizational citizenship behavior, workgroup cohesion, relationship and task conflict, issue interpretation, and information sharing.

This paper aims to explore the relationship between knowledge sharing factors, emotional intelligence and team conflict on the team performance during the inter-institutionalized collaboration work process.

This study was conducted in South Sulawesi and Central Sulawesi Province’s hospitals. The study lasted for six months in 2017. The sampling was done by using cluster method and stratified random sampling, which was based on Hospital Type, level of Health Officers. These characteristics were considered to have represented quite heterogeneous information about the characteristics of health workers. Data analysis approach used in this study was partial least square (PLS) using WarpPLS software.

Based on the results of data analysis, it can be concluded that there is a significant direct influence between emotional intelligence to knowledge management, emotional intelligence to team conflict, and emotional intelligence to team performance.

Some previous research studies that have been done are by Hasanyl et al. (2015), Othman (2010), Sathitsemakul (2005), Nóra. Obermayer-Kovács (2014), Troth (2009), Leung (2010) and Luca and Tarricone (2001). The novelty of this research is on the effort to see the mediation of knowledge sharing, team conflict and structure mechanism to other variables developed in the research model.