Perspective—A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups

References

• Adams WM, Brockington D, Dyson J, Vira B (2003) Managing tragedies: Understanding conflict over common pool resources. Science 302(5652):1915–1916.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amir Y (1969) Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psych. Bull. 71(5):319–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Kilduff GJ (2009) Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 96(2):491–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Willer R, Kilduff GJ, Brown CE (2012) The origins of deference: When do people prefer lower status? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 102(5):1077–1088.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barclay DW (1991) Interdepartmental conflict in organizational buying: The impact of the organizational context. J. Marketing Res. 28(2):145–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batson CD, Early S, Salvarani G (1997) Perspective taking: Imagining how another feels versus imaging how you would feel. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 23(7):751–758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Bratslavsky E, Finkenauer C, Vohs KD (2001) Bad is stronger than good. Rev. General Psych. 5(4):323–370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Behfar KJ, Mannix EA, Peterson RS, Trochim WM (2011) Conflict in small groups: The meaning and consequences of process conflict. Small Group Res. 42(2):127–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Behfar KJ, Peterson RS, Mannix EA, Trochim WM (2008) The critical role of conflict resolution in teams: A close look at the links between conflict type, conflict management strategies, and team outcomes. J. Appl. Psych. 93(1):170–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bendersky C (2014) Resolving ideological conflicts by affirming opponents’ status: The tea party, Obamacare and the 2013 government shutdown. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 53(July):163–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bendersky C, Hays NA (2012) Status conflict in groups. Organ. Sci. 23(2):323–340.Link, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Ridgeway CL, Fisek MH, Norman RZ (1998) The legitimation and delegitimation of power and prestige orders. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 63(3):379–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bezrukova K, Jehn KA, Zanutto EL, Thatcher SM (2009) Do workgroup faultlines help or hurt? A moderated model of faultlines, team identification, and group performance. Organ. Sci. 20(1):35–50.Link, Google Scholar
• Blair IV (2002) The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 6(3):242–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blake RR, Mouton JS (1981) Management by Grid® principles or situationalism: Which? Groups Organ. Management 6(4):439–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boulding KE (1963) Conflict and Defense: A General Theory (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Brewer MB (2007) The social psychology of intergroup relations: Social categorization, ingroup bias, and outgroup prejudice. Kruglanski AW, Higgins ET, eds. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, 2nd ed. (Guilford Press, New York),695–715.Google Scholar
• Bunderson JS, Boumgarden P (2010) Structure and learning in self-managed teams: Why “bureaucratic” teams can be better learners. Organ. Sci. 21(3):609–624.Link, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (2009) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Carton AM, Cummings JN (2012) A theory of subgroups in work teams. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):441–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carton AM, Cummings JN (2013) The impact of subgroup type and subgroup configurational properties on work team performance. J. Appl. Psych. 98(5):732–758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MH, Chang YC, Hung SC (2008) Social capital and creativity in R&D project teams. R&D Management 38(1):21–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cosier RA, Rose GL (1977) Cognitive conflict and goal conflict effects on task performance. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 19(2):378–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cramton CD, Hinds PJ (2004) Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning? Res. Organ. Behav. 26(December):231–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Curşeu PL, Schruijer SG, Boroş S (2012) Socially rejected while cognitively successful? The impact of minority dissent on groups’ cognitive complexity. British J. Soc. Psych. 51(4):570–582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Dreu CK (2006) When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams. J. Management 32(1):83–107.Google Scholar
• De Dreu CK, Beersma B (2005) Conflict in organizations: Beyond effectiveness and performance. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psych. 14(2):105–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Dreu CK, Van Vianen AE (2001) Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams. J. Organ. Behav. 22(3):309–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Dreu CKW, West MA (2001) Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. J. Appl. Psych. 86(6):1191–1201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Wit FR, Greer LL, Jehn KA (2012) The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 97(2):360–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deschamps JC, Brown R (1983) Superordinate goals and intergroup conflict. Brit. J. Soc. Psych. 22(3):189–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deutsch M (1973) The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diehl M, Stroebe W (1987) Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53(3):497–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doty DH, Glick WH (1994) Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. Acad. Management Rev. 19(2):230–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dovidio JF, Gaertner SL, Saguy T (2007) Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psych. 18(1):296–330.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dovidio JF, Gaertner SL, Saguy T (2009) Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 13(1):3–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dumas TL, Phillips KW, Rothbard NP (2013) Getting closer at the company party: Integration experiences, racial dissimilarity, and workplace relationships. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1377–1401.Link, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farh JL, Lee C, Farh CI (2010) Task conflict and team creativity: A question of how much and when. J. Appl. Psych. 95(6):1173–1180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiol CM, Pratt MG, O’Connor EJ (2009) Managing intractable identity conflicts. Acad. Management Rev. 34(1):32–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Waguespack DM (2007) Brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open innovation communities. Organ. Sci. 18(2):165–180.Link, Google Scholar
• Friedman RA, Podolny J (1992) Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: Labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37(1):28–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gaertner SL, Mann J, Murrell A, Dovidio JF (1989) Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 57(2):239–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF, Anastasio PA, Bachman BA, Rust MC (1993) The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psych. 4(1):1–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gaertner SL, Rust MC, Dovidio JF, Bachman BA, Anastasio PA (1994) The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias. Small Group Res. 25(2):224–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF, Banker BS, Houlette M, Johnson KM, McGlynn EA (2000) Reducing intergroup conflict: From superordinate goals to decategorization, recategorization, and mutual differentiation. Group Dynam.: Theory, Res., Practice 4(1):98–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson C, Vermeulen F (2003) A healthy divide: Subgroups as a stimulus for team learning behavior. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(2):202–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greer LL, Jehn KA, Mannix EA (2008) Conflict transformation: A longitudinal investigation of the relationships between different types of intragroup conflict and the moderating role of conflict resolution. Small Group Res. 39(3):278–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Polzer JT, Elfenbein HA (2011) Too many cooks spoil the broth: How high-status individuals decrease group effectiveness. Organ. Sci. 22(3):722–737.Link, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (1987) The design of work teams. Lorsch J, ed. Handbook of Organizational Behavior (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ), 315–342.Google Scholar
• Halevy N, Chou EY, Galinsky AD (2011) A functional model of hierarchy: Why, how, and when vertical differentiation enhances group performance. Organ. Psych. Rev. 1(1):32–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hays NA, Bendersky C (2015) Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 108(6):867–882.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hewstone M, Brown R (1986) Contact and Conflict in Intergroup Encounters (Blackwell, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Hogg MA, van Knippenberg D, Rast DE (2012) Intergroup leadership in organizations: Leading across group and organizational boundaries. Acad. Management Rev. 37(2):232–255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Homan AC, van Knippenberg D, Van Kleef GA, De Dreu CKW (2007) Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: Diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. J. Appl. Psych. 92(5):1189–1199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hornsey MJ, Hogg MA (2000) Subgroup relations: A comparison of mutual intergroup differentiation and common ingroup identity models of prejudice reduction. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 26(2):242–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Janis IL (1982) Groupthink (Houghton-Mifflin, Boston).Google Scholar
• Jehn KA (1995) A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(2):256–282.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn KA (1997) A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(3):530–557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Bendersky C (2003) Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. Res. Organ. Behav. 25(December):187–242.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Mannix EA (2001) The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Acad. Management J. 44(2):238–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Rispens S, Thatcher SM (2010) The effects of conflict asymmetry on work group and individual outcomes. Acad. Management J. 53(3):596–616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joshi A, Knight AP (2015) Who defers to whom and why? Dual pathways linking demographic differences and dyadic deference to team effectiveness. Acad. Management J. 58(1):59–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keltner D, Van Kleef GA, Chen S, Kraus MW (2008) A reciprocal influence model of social power: Emerging principles and lines of inquiry. Zanna MP, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 40 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 151–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein KJ, Ziegert JC, Knight AP, Xiao Y (2006) Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(4):590–621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kressel K, Dean G (1989) Mediation Research: The Process and Effectiveness of Third-Party Intervention (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Lau DC, Murnighan JK (2005) Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. Acad. Management J. 48(4):645–659.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lind EA, Tyler T (1988) The Social Psychology of Procedural Fairness (Plenum Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lovelace K, Shapiro DL, Weingart LR (2001) Maximizing cross-functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Acad. Management J. 44(4):779–793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magee JC, Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Acad. Management Ann. 2(1):351–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mannix E (2003) Editor’s comments: Conflict and conflict resolution— A return to theorizing. Acad. Management Rev. 28(4):543–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mannix EA (1993) Organizations as resource dilemmas: The effects of power balance on coalition formation in small groups. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 55(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marr JC, Thau S (2014) Falling from great (and not-so-great) heights: How initial status position influences performance after status loss. Acad. Management J. 57(1):223–248.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H (1971) Managerial work: Analysis from observation. Management Sci. 18(2):B97–B110.Link, Google Scholar
• Mucchi-Faina A, Pagliaro S (2008) Minority influence: The role of ambivalence toward the source. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 38(4):612–623.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murnighan JK, Conlon DE (1991) The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Admin. Sci. Quart. 36(2):165–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Organ DW (1988) Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome (Lexington Books, Lexington, MA).Google Scholar
• Pereira C, Vala J, Leyens JP (2009) From infra-humanization to discrimination: The mediation of symbolic threat needs egalitarian norms. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 45(2):336–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peterson RS, Nemeth CJ (1996) Focus versus flexibility: Majority and minority influence can both improve performance. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 22(1):14–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pondy LR (1967) Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Admin. Sci. Quart. 12(2):296–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pruitt DG, Carnevale PJ (1993) Negotiation in Social Conflict (Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Belmont, CA).Google Scholar
• Pruitt D, Rubin J (1986) Social conflict: Escalation, impasse, and resolution (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Rahim MA (2011) Managing Conflict in Organizations, 4th ed. (Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ).Google Scholar
• Raven B, Kruglanski A (1970) Conflict and Power. Swingle P, ed. The Structure of Conflict (Academic Press, New York), 69–109.Google Scholar
• Richeson JA, Nussbaum RJ (2004) The impact of multiculturalism versus color-blindness on racial bias. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 40(3):417–423.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Richter AW, West MA, Van Dick R, Dawson JF (2006) Boundary spanners’ identification, intergroup contact, and effective intergroup relations. Acad. Management J. 49(6):1252–1269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ronay R, Greenaway K, Anicich EM, Galinsky AD (2012) The path to glory is paved with hierarchy: When hierarchical differentiation increases group effectiveness. Psych. Sci. 23(6):669–677.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ross R (1994) The ladder of inference. Senge PM, Kleiner A, Roberts C, Ross RB, Smith BJ, eds. Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization (Crown Business, New York), 242–246.Google Scholar
• Saguy T, Tausch N, Dovidio JF, Pratto F (2009) The irony of harmony intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psych. Sci. 20(1):114–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherif M (1958) Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. Amer. J. Sociol. 63(4):349–536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherwyn D, Sturman MC (2002) Job sharing: A potential tool for hotel managers. Cornell Hotel Restaurant Admin. Quart. 43(5):84–91.Google Scholar
• Simmel G (1955) Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Spector PE, Fox S (2010) Theorizing about the deviant citizen: An attributional explanation of the interplay of organizational citizenship and counterproductive work behavior. Human Resource Management Rev. 20(2):132–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G, Titus W (1985) Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 48(6):1467–1478.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas K, Kilmann R (1974) A Forced-Choice Measure of Conflict-Handling Behavior: The “MODE” Instrument (Xicom Inc., Tuxedo, New York).Google Scholar
• Tinsley CH (2001) How negotiators get to yes: Predicting the constellation of strategies used across cultures to negotiate conflict. J. Appl. Psych. 86(4):583–593.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Scanlan TJ (1981) Boundary spanning individuals: Their role in information transfer and their antecedents. Acad. Management J. 24(2):289–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valley KL, White SB, Neale MA, Bazerman MH (1992) Agents as information brokers: The effects of information disclosure on negotiated outcomes. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 51(2):220–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wade-Benzoni KA, Hoffman AJ, Thompson LL, Moore DA, Gillespie JJ, Bazerman MH (2002) Barriers to resolution in ideologically based negotiations: The role of values and institutions. Acad. Management Rev. 27(1):41–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner DG, Berger J (1993) Status characteristics theory: The growth of a program. Berger J, Zelditch J, Morris, eds. Theoretical Research Programs: Studies in the Growth of Theory (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA), 23–63.Google Scholar
• Walton RE, Dutton JM (1969) The management of interdepartmental conflict: A model and review. Admin. Sci. Quart. 14(1):73–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE (1999) Theory construction as disciplined reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s. Acad. Management Rev. 24(4):797–806.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE, Roberts KH (1993) Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38(3):357–381.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weingart LR, Behfar KJ, Bendersky C, Todorova G, Jehn KA (2015) The directness and oppositional intensity of conflict expression. Acad. Management Rev. 40(2):235–262.Crossref, Google Scholar