Chapter 5

CONFLICT WITHIN
TEAMS
LDRS 807: Leadership in Teams and Collaborative Environments
Team Competency Project
Amy Gade
Matthew Smoot
Charles Lindberg

July 22, 2014

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

Introduction
Due to growing demands for efficiency and flexibility, organizations are utilizing more
and more team based structures to conduct business. Team based structures can consist of
traditional brick and mortar teams where members gather in the same room, at the same time,
and work on a particular project, as well as virtual or geographically distributed teams where
members are separated by geographic distance and use alternate forms of communication to
accomplish their goals, assignments, or tasks. Team based structures bring both assets like
increased knowledge, creativity, understanding, acceptance of ideas, improved commitment and
motivation, as well as liabilities such as stifled ideas resulting in conformity or increased cases
of free riding (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
Learning Objectives
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
-Understand conflict as it relates to team dynamics
-Understand conflict triggers that may impact team work
-Understand the difference between constructive and destructive conflict within teams
-Understand the dynamics of conflict in brick and mortar and virtual teams
-Understand how different cultures define and attend to team conflict
-Understand various conflict theories as they apply to work in teams
-Understand the universal repercussions of team conflict
-Understand best practice ways to assess, address, and resolve team conflicts for success
Psychology of Conflict
Conflict is a natural result of people working together when sharing perceptions, goals,
and values. All conflicts share some common elements. These elements include the need for at
least two parties to be involved, there is some sort of interaction, some sort of struggle,
disagreement, or threat between the two parties, and emotions of some sort typically enter into
the interaction that involve discrepancies, incompatible wishes, or irreconcilable desires (Jehn &
Mannix, 2001).
Early Perspective of Team Conflict
Early perspectives of team conflict focused on static levels of conflict, ignoring the
different patterns of conflict that might occur over time. Stage models (such as Tuckmans
model of forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning) were believed to be an
accurate group dynamic as well as a way of problem solving. Over time, it became apparent that
while the stages remained intact for both brick and mortar and virtual teams, it was more
relevant to consider how much and when conflict occurs. These occurrences disrupt the smooth,
efficient operation of a team and may be used to mask negative relationship issues. Only when
specific types of conflicts were identified and at what point in the team process they occurred
was noted, did this early perspective begin to change (Jehn & Mannix, 2001). These conflict
types were identified as relationship conflicts, task conflicts, and process conflicts.

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

Contemporary Perspective of Team Conflict

A more contemporary perspective of team conflict, as noted above, has to consider all the
varying situations and relationships in which conflict may arise. Conflict can present itself in
brick and mortar teams and virtual teams alike. Conflict can be present in team member to
team member relationships, as well as within team to supervisor relationships. Conflict can
present itself in verbal, nonverbal, and electronic forms of communication. Most importantly, a
contemporary perspective of team conflict should not assume conflict management comes in a
one size fits all style. In addition, it is equally critical for team members and leaders to remain
attuned to common causes of conflict, the various stages of conflict, and the different approaches
to conflict management, as well as the differences between constructive and destructive conflict,
the principles of conflict theory, varying team dynamics, and the impact of both properly
managed and unresolved conflict to best select their method of acknowledgement and resolve for
a variety of situations involving conflict within teams (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
Understanding Conflict as it Relates to Team Dynamics
Root Causes for Three Types of Conflict
The sources of conflict interplay within teams. Four major categories have been
identified as culprits for conflict: communication, emotional impulses, personal values, and
individual needs. Additional sources of impact for conflict are resources, styles, perception,
goals, pressures, roles, and unpredictable policies (Shrivastava & Shrivastava, 2012). The
impact of these on the three types of conflict is as follows:
1) Relationship conflicts consist of interpersonal incompatibilities and create affective
components within members such as feelings of tension, annoyance, frustration,
irritation, or friction. Relationship conflict involves such personal issues as dislike
among group members and is detrimental to team performance, member satisfaction, and
the likelihood the team will work together in the future (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
2) Task conflict consists of differences in viewpoints or opinions pertaining to group tasks.
Task conflict may create animated discussions or personal excitement, but do not contain
interpersonal negative emotions that are present in relationship conflict. Moderate levels
of task conflict may be beneficial to team performance. Teams may benefit from sharing
differences of opinion and improved decision quality because the synthesis of the team
emerges from the conflict rather than from an individual perspective providing a
generally superior perspective (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
3) Process conflict consists of controversies about the aspect of how tasks will be
accomplished. Process conflict pertains to issues of duty and resource delegation and
when team members disagree about whose responsibility it is to complete specific duties.
Process conflict has been associated with lower level of team morale and decreased

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

productivity. Process conflict interferes with content quality and often misdirects focus
back to irrelevant discussions of member ability (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).

Impact of Conflict on Type of Team

Once identified, the question of whether these conflicts impacted brick and mortar
teams in the same manner as virtual teams was raised. Research revealed that there are both
some similarities and some specific and unique problems for virtual teams. Similarities that were
identified within both types of teams were that they consisted of individuals who work together
interdependently to accomplish a task, constitute distinct social entities, and jointly manage their
team boundaries (Hinds & Bailey, 2003).
Virtual teams face specific and unique challenges such as being coached from a distance,
being faced with potentially frequent travel, and repeated delays. In addition, virtual team
conflicts go unidentified and unaddressed longer than those of brick and mortar teams. In
addition, technologies that virtual teams rely on vary in the degree of promoting or preventing
exclusion (Hinds & Bailey, 2003).
Understand conflict triggers that may impact team work
Team Culture
Teams have specific, identifiable cultures. One aspect of team culture is the similarity
of work values (innovativeness, carefulness, autonomy, adaptability, and informality) amongst its
members. If team members have similar values, they tend to agree on norms regarding work,
which decreases interpersonal tension and promotes harmony. When team members have
differing values, friction and emotional upset may occur. Team value consensus reduces
relationship and process conflict, but not necessarily task conflict (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
Team Member Personalities
Using the Big Five factor model of personality traits (emotional stability,
extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness) as well as subcategories of each trait, team effectiveness and conflict can be predicted to some degree.
Research indicates that high levels of the Big Five factor personality traits are conducive to
having a successful team with smaller amounts of conflict. The higher the negative behaviors
displayed within the team the less effective the team becomes. The following table shows the
personality traits and sub-categories that impact the effectiveness of team membership:
Personality Traits of Team Players
Personality Trait/Sub-

Positive Behaviors Displayed

Negative Behaviors Displayed

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

Category
Emotional Stability

Adjustment

Adaptability

Extraversion

Dominance

Affiliation
Social Perceptiveness

Expressivity
Openness

Flexibility

Agreeableness
Cooperation
Conscientiousness

Dutiful
Achievement

Well-adjusted, calm, secure

and self-confident

Freedom from anxiety,

depression, and somatic
complaints
Mutual adjustment among
team members and
reallocation of resources.
Combination of
Assertiveness/Dominance,
Social ability/affiliation
Striving for superiority,
control and influence over
others.
Desire to engage in activities
with others versus being alone
Sensitivity to social
cues/recognize what others
expect in social situations.
Have social insight, empathy
and awareness of motives,
needs and intention of other.
Interpersonally expressive and
communicative
Reflects intellectual, cultural
or creative interests
The ability to adjust ones
behavior to suit changing
interpersonal situations.
Kind, trustful and warm.
Giving others the benefit of
the doubt. Cooperative.
Competent, responsible,
hardworking, dependable, and
organized.
Value and adhere to
obligations and duties.
Ambitious, achievement-

Distressed, upset, hostile,

irritable and nervous, do not
excel in interpersonal or team
settings.
Ill-tempered, emotionally
unstable, disruptive.
Unwilling to make changes.

The more dominant a person

is the less effective team
player they become.
Headstrong, controlling and
combative.
Withdrawn, reserved, aloof
and prefer solitary tasks.
Ignores social insight, no
interest regarding how others
feel and think.

Reserved, taciturn and

impassive.
Research shows little direct
relationship between this trait
and conflict/effectiveness.
Rigid in behavior and
unwilling to accept change.
Selfish, distrustful and hostile.
Overly competitive and
uncooperative.
Impulsive, irresponsible and
disordered.
No sense of responsibility for
team outcomes.
Not willing to take on duties

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

oriented, takes initiative in

pursuing goals.
(Driskell, Salas, Goodwin, & OShea, 2006).

that lead to accomplishment of

tasks.

Personality traits have a higher impact on brick and mortar team members than on
virtual team members. Brick and mortar individuals behave in an assertive, forceful, and selfassured manner in order to dominate other team members. Dominant individuals make
themselves seem both expert at the task and socially skilled, which lead team members to afford
them more influence and control. There is less control and dominance effectiveness with
virtual team members as they are not physically present to exert these traits (Anderson &
Kilduff, 2009).
Understanding the Difference between Constructive and Destructive Conflict within Teams.
Conflict within a team can be positive or negative, constructive or destructive, dependent
upon how team members and management address it as well as identifying its origin and how it
evolves within the team.
Constructive team conflict can be functional in that it prevents team members from
becoming complacent, allows them to work at optimum levels, be open to evaluating other
members perspective, experiences, and interests with desirable outcomes. Constructive team
conflict is typically cognitive in nature and aimed at issues, ideas, principles, or processes.
Constructive team conflict allows team members to grow or change personally as a result of the
conflict; it increases involvement of everyone affected by the conflict within the team and builds
cohesiveness among the members of the team with a solution being the final result (Langfred &
Moye, 2014).
Destructive team conflict can be dysfunctional in that it disrupts the team, is stressful,
and gets in the way of accomplishing goals. Team member conflict is typically affective in
nature and is aimed at specific people, emotions, or values. Destructive team conflict polarizes or
drives team members, destroys moral, and diverts energy away from valuable activities where no
solution can be reached and the problem(s) continue to exist (Langfred & Moye, 2014).
Understanding the Dynamics of Conflict in Brick and Mortar Teams
Factors in the work environment are the immediate cause of reactions in team
members which often affects their work attitudes and behaviors. Conflicts are typically
intertwined with emotions that impact team functioning and processes of trust and cooperation.
In brick and mortar teams, triggered emotions are usually conveyed through facial expressions,
vocal prosody, and body cues. These may evoke a response from other team members creating
an interactive expression that can help modify behaviors or serve as a crucial social function.
During the forming stage, team members are getting to know each other and complete
basic organizing of meetings along with some initial statements to each other about the nature of

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

the task, the goals that are to be established, and general housekeeping tasks (Tomai, Mebane,
Rosa, Ingravalle & Benedetti, 2013).
During the storming stage, members discuss their ideas and interpretation of the
tasks. This is also the time that conflict typically begins. Social loafing can occur at this stage.
Conflict and emotional behaviors begin to occur in this stage depending upon how long a team
spends on the project. Team members engage in heated debates attempting to influence the
definition of goals creating tension, frustration, hostility, disunity, and emotional turmoil (Tomai
et al., 2013).
During the norming stage, members struggle with internal struggles, development
processes, and dealing with conflict and competition. Team members may attempt to soothe
interpersonal conflict with other members and engage in reconciliation. Team members feel
accepted and part of the group. Team rules emerge during this stage (Tomai et al., 2013).
During the performing stage, team members feel satisfied with their efficacy as a
team; behaviors are flexible and roles adapt to changing needs of the team. The task is to stay
focused to reach the final goals of the team (Tomai et al., 2013).
During the adjourning stage, team members have a variety of emotions; they are
satisfied with finishing the project and sad because the team will be ending. Evaluation of team
performance typically takes place in this stage (Tomai et al., 2013).
Understanding the Dynamics of Conflict in Virtual Teams
Factors in the virtual environment are that there typically is a lapse in
communication especially of negative emotions which slows the process down. By venting their
frustration, it allows team members to realize that the team has important gaps in the
understanding of the team goals, processes, and technology of the team project (Ayoko, Konrad
& Boyle, 2012).
During the forming stage, virtual team members are exchanging email addresses
and organizing online meetings for discussing the assignments. They are also practicing and
becoming comfortable with the technology platform that will be used for negotiating the tasks
(Ayoko et al., 2012).
During the storming stage for virtual team members, there is considerable amounts
of time spent on member reflection of their understanding of the process to date or to express
their confusion with the process or content, along with general questions or to ask/confirm with
the team what direction it was taking. Some virtual team members may still be struggling with
the forming stage in terms of the technology being used. In addition, although moving forward,
the team experiences a substantial amount of cognitive and affective conflict, accompanied with
negative emotions with interpersonal attacks erupting (Ayoko et al., 2012).
During the norming stage for virtual members, behaviors focus on sorting out the
internal struggles, developmental processes, and dealing with conflict and competition.

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

Reconciliation may be attempted between team members and seeking feedback from other team
members as a method of navigating this stage. In addition, some mediation may be used to
make progress and build effective working rapport amongst team members (Ayoko et al., 2012).
During the performing stage, the team manages to stabilize their processes and pull
together to complete the project. Team members become fully engaged in task and meet team
goals. Increased task focus and information clarification exchanges occur and the use of
symbols are introduced to refer to new or additional information which helps with the chain of
logic in virtual teams. Humor may return to the team members with the use of smiley faces,
grinning teeth emoticons, which create an informal relaxed environment and encourages other
team members to engage (Ayoko et al., 2012).
Understand How Different Cultures Define and Attend to Team Conflict
Research suggests that conflict is more pervasive in multinational companies where
intercultural adaptation must take place. The influence of culture will impact the style in which
conflict is handled. There are three dimensions of culture which have the greatest impact on
conflict resolution behavior: individualism versus collectivism, high versus low context, and the
orientation of the culture. Individualistic cultures adopt a more dominating style of dealing with
conflict and are more likely to push for closure, whereby members of collectivistic cultures use
more accommodating and avoiding styles. Members of high context cultures are concerned with
saving face and would back down in the face of conflict in an attempt to do so (Ma, Chih-Cheng,
& Tanev, 2012).
Research indicates that within normal communication only 70 percent of the message is
understood but in cross cultural situations 50 percent is likely. This inability to communicate
across cultures is reflected through conflict. In addition, the role of language creates immediate
barriers, as communication assigns meaning to the situation and requires a response. The
process creates conflict when the dissimilarity between the two different cultures is wider in
variation (Shrivastava & Shrivastava, 2012).
Ethnocentrism is a kind of discrimination where team member behaviors, attitudes, and
belief is that ones own culture is virtuous and superior with higher standards of value and
considers other group members culture as contemptible and inferior. Aspects such as language,
accent, physical features, or religion are included in ethnocentrism. (Shrivastava & Shrivastava,
2012).
Countries that have had a long history of conflict may impact team members ability to
work together. Historical conflicts such as these may be an avenue in resolving issues within the
team but require a great deal of time, effort, and commitment from the team members
(Shrivastava & Shrivastava, 2012).
Understand Various Conflict Theories as They Apply to Work in Teams
Conflict theory has a seemingly long history and well-defined place within subjects such
as sociology. For the purposes of this text, conflict theory should be defined as a set of ideas

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

intended to explain conflict in its various situations and forms. In general, conflict theory seeks
to explain scientifically how conflict starts, varies from situation to situation, and what effect
conflict may have on a team (Allan, 2007). Undoubtedly, its formation began with Karl Marxs
work regarding class and capitalism dialects in the mid-1800s (Allan, 2007). He believed
capitalism would cause its own surmise due to peoples high concern with class structure (Walsh,
2012). In the early twentieth century, a second theorist, Max Weber, expanded on and refuted
some of Marxs original claims (Allan, 2007). While he believed the economy was partly to
blame for conflict, he saw conflict as a part of societal relationships. Weber also went as far as to
claim that conflict will always exist, regardless of the social, economic, or political nature of
society, and that it was functional because of its role in bringing disputes into the open for public
debate (Walsh, 2012).
Pieces of these original claims regarding conflict have long been considered and
scrutinized, which lead to the development of a much more accepted contingency theory of
conflict of De Dreu and Weingart (Thompson, 2011). This contingency perspective focuses more
on task conflict, which can be defined as differences in ideas, opinions, and viewpoints about
task conflict (Shaw, Zhu, Duffy, Scott, Shih & Susanto, 2011, p. 391). It is said that these
conflicts can have effects on the great effectiveness of the team, including individual and team
performance and member satisfaction within the team. The contingency perspective, views team
performance as a function of the type of task conflict, the conflict management style, and the
nature of the task performed by the group (Thompson, 2011, p. 189).

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

10

The figure above shows that the amount of conflict is directly related to team
performance and overall individual team member satisfaction (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003).
Notably, an individuals well-being has a powerful effect on how they will approach, understand,
and ultimately deal with conflict (Thompson, 2011). Another important feature of this model is
the approach selected to managing conflict. Some of these management styles were addressed
earlier, like collaborating or avoiding, yet De Dreu and Weingart (2003) also include the conflict
management style coined as contending. They believe in contending there are two varying styles,
either rights- or power-based approaches (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003). According to Thompson
(2011), a rights-based argument focuses on applying some standard of fairness, precedent,
contract or low (p. 191). On the other hand, a power-based argument uses tactics of control,
authority, influence, or pressure (Thompson, 2011). The approach to conflict management, the
type of task conflict (process or content related), and the level uncertainty regarding the assigned
task are all factors to be considered when using the contingency approach. Whats most
important to remember about this contingency theory approach is that there is no one best
management style for effectively dealing with different situations (Rahim, 2002).
Understand the Universal Repercussions of Team Conflict
Productivity
A preponderance of research supports that there is a coherently negative relationship
between task conflict and team performance, rooted in the position that such conflict causes
discomfort, leading to increasingly unwanted strain and worry among members. Thus, as
progressive anxiety and discord take hold within the group, everyone involved must personally
apportion more energy and effort to focus on these issues (Shaw et al., 2001). Some group
members may attempt to circumvent or avoid underlying conflict at all costs, leading to
inactivity and avoidance, neglect of information, and low joint performance (De Dreu, 2006, p.
86).
When a team either deliberately or subconsciously ignores or evades conflict issues that
are present amongst the team, stagnancy further sets it. As a result, the lack of communication
leads to subsequent declines in team member satisfaction, ultimately resulting in participatory
declines with regard to team functions and tasks (Wageman, Hackman, & Lehman, 2005).
Actively steering clear of divergent views or opposing intentions simply doesnt allow any team

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

11

identity to manifest, as this lack of group identification will garner no additional effort by
members to attain team specific goals (Han & Harms, 2010).
Alternatively yet equally detrimental to the teaming process, some team members may be
excessively prone to engaging in high conflict behaviors with other group members. This
diminishes a teams ability to cognitively assess and process critical data, specifically relevant to
teamwork tasks (Walton, 1969). When it then becomes crucial for project related decisions to be
made, individuals are more likely to make suboptimal concessions, thus, foregoing attempts to
achieve greater quality outcomes with the assigned tasks, due to an unwillingness or perceived
inability to better address the existing conflict (Shaw et al., 2011, p. 392). Another studied result
of frequently high, emotionally charged conflict between team members, suggests that task
related issues are not unanimously communicated to the whole group. While this is done in an
effort to reduce unwanted reactions and internal strife, the inevitable result is the further
damaging of team connectedness. This is due to the negative reactions received when task
contingent input and information is not wholly solicited or disseminated among the group
(Korsgaard, Schweiger, & Sapienza, 1995).
Implications Specific to Team Members
Work Team Effectiveness
In order to better understand the negative impacts experienced by teams dealing with
conflict, it is imperative to further examine the effects felt by the individuals who make up each
collective group. Research has reliably shown that a pre-cursor to team conflict stems from a
lack of cultivated trust between team members. This is particularly notable and vulnerable early
on in the teaming process, when the determination of this expectation between group members is
so vital to personal feelings of team belonging and interpersonal ties (Curseu & Schruijer, 2006).
Therefore, as initial trust is paramount to cohesion among teams, individuals who feel
this is lacking never develop an innate sense of wellbeing within the group. Researchers have
hypothesized this phenomenon to be known as psychological safety, a cognitive state
experienced by individuals who develop trust and security within teams (Bradley, Postlethwaite,
Klotz, Hamdani & Brown, 2012). In turn, a lack of psychological safety in teams doesnt permit
members to feel that any risks can be taken, thus, allowing an environment of unacceptance,
shame, and denunciation to dominate (Edmonson, 1999).
While naturally an uncooperative environment bodes problems for task effectiveness
within teams, it is at the physiological level where individual are experiencing their own harmful,
symptomatic effects of the negative milieu. Multiple physical stressors such as increased heart
rate and muscle tension, along with raised adrenaline and cortisol levels, contribute to an
ongoing slew of psychological reactions between team members in team settings (Quick, Quick,
Nelson & Hurrell, 1997). Left unaddressed, effects from the conflict ridden environment can
manifest further as chronic physical symptoms such as fatigue, dizziness or pain for the
individual suffering of anxiety or depression, potentially leading to exhaustion, excessive sick
leave and even loss of employment (Dijkstra, Beersma, & Cornelissen, 2012). Paradoxically,
there is lack of research focusing on the personal health effects on individuals due to conflict in
the workplace, which most certainly demands more attention (Dijkstra et al., 2011). It would be

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

12

remiss to continue to avoid such microcosmic effects, as this consequence, which appears to
often hide in plain sight, leads to better-known problems on a grand scale for organizations.
Overall Implications for Organizations
Monetary Costs to Company
International studies that have adapted and tested versions of an Occupational Stress
Indicator reveal that stress and its related effects on employees are a leading cause of work
related health problems (Dijkstra et al., 2012). The European Agency for Safety and Health at
Work (2007) found that in a researched pool of 15 unionized countries, stress related ailments
and complaints affected 20% of employees, ultimately costing a total upwards of 20 billion
dollars per year in lost revenue. Another noteworthy report by the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America (2014), found that in a study on a major, world-class
mining project with all-encompassing capital expenditures ranging between 3 and 5 billion
dollars, the project was losing an estimated 20 million dollars per week, all due to social conflict
that had erupted among the team and vested stakeholders. Such jaw dropping figures, along with
extensively conducted empirically based interviews and case analysis, help to serve as a
reminder that the far reaching impacts of cost related social conflict, directly translated into lost
productivity and profit continue to be financially crippling for businesses entities in all sectors
(Franks, Davis, Bebbington, Ali, Kemp & Scurrah, 2014).
As these serve as just two examples of the far reaching fiscal effects felt, it is of note to
add that repeated turnover related to conflict, along with continual recruitment and retention
costs, all equate to a dysfunctional cycle and major problem for countless organizations (Abelson
& Baysinger, 1984). Moreover, additional and growing concerns due to workplace threats such
as bullying and other forms of harassment naturally result in more frequent lawsuits and cost
prohibitive litigation (Cooper & Cartwright, 1994). Even aside from all the grim statistics
related to quantifiable monetary loss, organizations must realize they are also sacrificing their
most valuable resource in the process, the knowledge based contributions of their
human/employee investments.
Understand Best Practice Ways to Assess, Address, and Resolve Team Conflicts for Success
As already discussed, conflict has become an accepted part of life, especially during
interactions within a group setting. Since it is crucial for groups to be able to manage their
conflicts for success, not all conflicts can be handled in the same way. Thus, it is essential that
individuals are able to understand, prepare for, and minimize team conflict to prevent it from
being detrimental to their overall goals. While this may sound like an easy task to accomplish,
there are some complications in terms of minimizing team conflict. First, there is little
consideration in terms of clear, set rules as to when conflict should be maintained, reduced,
ignored, or enhanced. Second there are no set guidelines on how to achieve the reduction of or
potential improvements through the course of conflict issues. Lastly, there is not a defined set of
rules for indicating how solving conflict which involves various situations can be managed
successfully (Rahim, 2002). This section poses to inform readers on available principles which
may help minimize team conflict in various situations.
Avoiding/Minimizing Team Conflict

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

13

Many individuals have looked to define conflict in terms of a set of steps or rules for
resolving team conflict. According to Rahim (2002), conflict resolution implies reduction,
elimination, or termination of conflict (p. 207). Principles of conflict resolution include things
like negotiation, bargaining, mediation, and arbitration. But because conflict has been noted to
provide both dysfunctions, as most often assumed and functional outcomes for the team, this
approach to conflict in teams may be missing something. In order to provide a more
encompassing approach to conflict, one should consider the ideals of conflict management.
Adoption of Guidelines/Principles
Conflict Management
Conflict management involves creating strategies to minimize the dysfunction of conflict
and enhance the constructive nature to improve learning and effectiveness in teams and
organizations. Contrary to conflict resolution, holistically, conflict management does not imply
ignorance, lessening, or dismissal of conflict (Rahim, 2002). Instead, one of the primary aims of
conflict management is to work through conflict functionally toward task completion or goal
attainment (Olaniran, 2010). Because of this, successes come more often when conflict is
targeted, then managed using strategies discuss below (Miranda & Bostrom, 1994).
For conflict management strategies to be most effective, they should satisfy certain
criteria. The criteria, listed below, while noted for conflict management, can also be useful in
decision making (Rahim, 2002).
Organizational Learning and Effectiveness.
Strategies for conflict management should enhance overall organizational learning, which should
in turn lead to longer-term effectiveness within the team. To obtain this objective, these strategies
should enhance critical and creative thinking to learn problem diagnosis and intervention
(Rahim, 2002).
Needs of Stakeholders.
Strategies for conflict management should be designed to meet the needs and
expectations of major stakeholders. Picking the right stakeholders to solve the right problems can
increasingly enhance this strategy. When multiple stakeholders are at bay, involving these parties
in problem solving that enhances learning and effectiveness should lead to greater satisfaction
amongst these stakeholders (Rahim, 2002). The inclusion of individual team members
interpretations of expectations, goals, and responsibilities in the overall group cohesion are other
factors that affect individual stakeholders needs (Olaniran, 2010).

Ethics.
Ethical management is an important part of any conflict management strategy. Defining a
problem that leads to ethical actions for the benefit of the greater good equates to a successful
problem diagnosis. In order to support these criteria, members should be open to new

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

14

information and be willing to alter their thoughts or opinions on certain ethical matters. Team
members also have the responsibility of speaking out against decisions that may have ethical
consequences that affect the greater team (Rahim, 2002).
In order to satisfy the above mentioned criteria, an effective conflict management strategy
should: a.) Minimize affective conflicts, those inconsistencies in interpersonal relationships, at
various levels (this happens when team members note their thoughts, feelings, or emotions
regarding certain issues are incompatible with those of other team members), b.) Recognize and
maintain a moderate level of task-related conflict, which will allow the team an opportunity to
enhance individual performances while not interfering with task completion, c.) Select and
implement appropriate conflict management strategies, which may require training and
experience on dealing with various conflict situations (Rahim, 2002).
Styles of Dealing with Conflict
Most research on conflict management strategies and processes have resulted in a twodimensional or dual concern approach (Speakman & Ryals, 2010). This approach suggests that
the type of conflict management mode selected stems from two underlying motives: concern for
oneself and concern for others (Desivilya & Yagil, 2005). The behaviors or actions suggested
result from ones perceived self-interests, in which competitive behavior is used, or those of
others, in which more accommodating behavior is utilized (Speakman & Ryals, 2010). The
strength of each of these motives may vary as a result of the particular conflict situation, with
differing emphases resulting in five major conflict management patterns: 1.) Dominating, which
displays high concern for self and low concern for others, 2.) Obliging, which displays low
concern for self and high concern for others, 3.) Avoiding, which displays low concern for both
self and others, 4.) Integrating, which displays both high concern for self and others, and 5.)
Compromising, which displays a moderate concern for both self and others (Desivilya & Yagil,
2005). The conflict grid and resulting styles are presented in the figure below.

CONCERN FOR SELF

HIGH

LOW

Integrating

LOW
HIGH
CONCERN
FOR OTHERS
Obliging

Compromising

These conflict styles can probably best be illustrated by considering a specific conflict
situation. Imagine that your boss has come to you with some good news and some bad news.
The good news is that the University you work for has a chance to advertise in a newspaper that
reaches all high schools in your local feeder city. The bad news is that either you or your co-

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

15

worker, Megan, will have to spend a healthy portion of the weekend preparing your advertising
proposal. Your boss has told you and Megan to work it out and have the proposal ready to go
by Monday morning. Now, neither you nor Megan really wants to work over the weekend, but
the work must get done. According to the above figure, you could approach this conflict in five
distinct ways.
First, you could simply decide not to talk with Megan about the problem because you
know the issue will not be easy to resolve. This strategy results in you avoiding the situation,
showing little concern for you or Megans needs. To no surprise, this strategy is rarely effective.
Two other strategies emphasize one persons needs at the sake of the other persons. For
example, by obliging the situation, you could simply offer to work the weekend because you
know Megan wants some time off and you hate to take that away from her. This strategy,
however, does nothing to satisfy your own needs. Or, you could put everything against Megan,
insisting that shell have to work because you cannot. This strategy, known as dominating, might
get you what you want, but sacrifices Megans needs in the process. A fourth strategy,
compromising, could involve you both working a portion of the weekend to complete the
proposal. Although this strategy seems ideal in many ways, it means neither of you will be able
to follow through with your weekend plans. Finally, you might sit down with Wilma in terms of
integrating a solution that could benefit both of you. For example, you might find that you both
have Thursday and Friday evenings free, and by working together, you can write the proposal
without relinquishing weekend plans.
Another general strategy for dealing with conflict management is known as bargaining, or
negotiation. According to Miller (2003), bargaining constitutes a unique form of conflict
management in that the participants negotiate mutually shared rules and then cooperate within
these rules to gain a competitive advantage over their opponent (p. 190). Bargaining has several
important characteristics worth mentioning. First, bargaining is typically a formal activity, in
which opponents settle conflict about scarce resources or policy arguments. Second, bargaining
often involves the use of individuals serving as representatives for the parties involved in the
dispute. Finally, bargaining strategies are often used for intergroup or inter-organizational
conflicts (Miller, 2003). Through these additional points of clarity, it can be assumed that
bargaining often works with groups larger than 10, in which a formal agreement and the use of
representatives might be helpful for the greater good of those involved.
Factors Influencing the Conflict Management Process
Having discussed difference conflict management processes, it is important to discuss
the variety of factors that should be considered as influential to this process, specifically,
personal, relational, cultural, and location factors.
Personal Factors.
It might seem easy to think that personality or gender could strongly influence conflict
management resolutions. Indeed, our cultural stereotypes tend to suggest that men are prone to
use dominating strategies, whereas women are more likely to oblige or compromise in the face of
conflict. It also seems likely that peoples preference for conflict management strategies might
depend on their own personality characteristics, like aggressiveness, introversion, or desire to

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

16

control situations. Many of these thoughts, however, are based on assumptions and actually carry
little weight. Contrary to belief, personality and gender have limited impact on conflict
management tactics (Miller, 2003, p. 194). It is instead a matter of how the individual frames
the conflict that can influence the manner in which its managed. Individuals often frame conflict
in terms of what they have to gain or what they might lose. It is this state of mind that can, for
example, lead someone who sees they have a possibility of losing through conflict to take more
risks (Miller, 2003).
Relational Factors.
Contrarily, it is the relationship between conflict parties that can have a strong impact on
conflict management. One of the major factors involved in relationship conflicts is that of power,
or the perceived hierarchal position of those involved in the conflict (Miller, 2003). According to
De Dreu and Van Vianen (2001), relationship conflicts concern insights and information that are
unrelated to the task, involve negative emotions and threaten ones personal identity and feelings
of self-worth (p.310). These things can be extremely damaging to the teams output, as it
required personal resources to be allocated to dealing with these non-task related issues, leaving
fewer resources for processing and resolving task needs (Shaw et al., 2001).
Cultural Factors.
Aspects of organizational and ethnic cultures can most definitely influence the way
conflict is expressed and managed (Miller, 2003). Anxieties about race, ethnic biases, religious
differences, language barriers, and those uncommunicated organization norms are often
experienced and can interfere with overall team function causing conflict (Korinek & Kimball,
2003).
Location Factors.
Geographically distributed teams are often susceptible to conflict. Issues with technology
mediums, communication breakdowns, message interpretations, and time differences are just a
few of the issues that can cause conflict in geographically distributed teams. Olaniran (2010)
notes other impacts like communication concurrence, lack of team structure, non-equalized
participation, general apprehension, and lack of consensus development as other common
location factors that may influence the conflict management process.
Effectively Assessing Team Conflict
Effectively assessing team conflict can look different for every team an every varying
conflict situation approached. Teams may choose to manage conflict different even in situations
in which the team is composed of the same members (Olaniran, 2010). Likewise, teams may
choose to handle a similar conflict experienced in a different way after being able to reflect on
their approach, its impact on the team, and the results of their management. Needless to say,
there is no proper way to assess team conflict; instead there are simply some factors that may
help a team determine the most proper approach.
When conflict is first identified, one of the best things a team member or leader can do is
to be positive about the situation and supportive of the individual/s that brought attention to the

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

17

issue. According to Korinek and Kimball (2003), a person should always be supported and
respected, however much his or her functions may be challenged, provoked, amplified, or
criticized (p. 301). It takes a lot of strength and courage to bring light to a conflict, whether its
being experienced by individual team members or the whole. In giving support, its important to
be very upfront and honest with your opinions and criticisms. Be careful not to blend support and
criticism or to caboose negativity to the end of supportive statements, as in doing so, that
support is negated (Korinek & Kimball, 2003).
In assessing effective team conflict and effective management approaches, it is
imperative to be mindful of the teams goals, past accomplishments, and remaining tasks. It is
also essential to consider team norms and relationship factors that may have influenced conflict
amongst members. Review the hierarchy and power in the team and address any vulnerability
needed in order to clarify any incorrect assumptions about control (Korinek & Kimball, 2003).
Determine who will have ultimate say with any decisions made and be sure that is clearly and
concisely expressed to all team members for mutual understanding. Express humility; in doing
so, all will be in a better place for minimizing conflict and actually promote less conflictual
relationships amongst team members (Korinek & Kimball, 2003). Lastly, learn when to confront
conflict that may be damaging to the team dynamic or goal attainment and accept when you
should refrain from conflict confrontation. Conflicts will arise in most team situations, but not
every battle requires a fight (Korinek & Kimball, 2003). Similarly, not every conflict situation is
damaging. Some conflicts actually promote increased team cohesiveness, new and effective team
norms, or even increased creativity or motivation.
Resolving Team Conflict
While many have said it is true that no two situations in dealing with conflict are the
same, it has been indicated by others that one style of conflict management may be more
appropriate than another depending on the distinct situation at hand.
Integrating
Integrating style (both high concern for self and others) is often associated with problemsolving situations. Utilizing this style involves open communication, the exchange of
information, the search for alternative solutions, and the review of differences to find the best
and most acceptable solution for both parties at hand. This style is most helpful in dealing with
complex issues or those that cannot be solved by one individual alone. By using the skills,
information, and other resources of different parties to define the problem and to find effective
alternative solutions, those involved are satisfied and able to commit to the solution. This
problem-solving approach is often good for social conflict and when dealing with strategic
organization issues (Rahim, 2002).
Obliging
Obliging style (low concern for self, but high concern for others) is often associated with
the need to downplay differences and emphasize common grounds. This style is useful when one
party is unaware of the issues involved in the conflict or the issue at hand is more significant to
the other party that one is willing to give up something to satisfy that other party. In a situation in

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

18

which saving the relationship is more important than the issue at hand, this style works well
(Rahim, 2002).
Dominating
Dominating style (high concern for self, but low concern for others) has a win-lose
orientation. In an attempt to win ones objective, the needs and expectations of the other party
involved are often of little concern or relevance. This style of conflict management may be
appropriate when the issues involved are extremely important to the party or an arguably
unfavorable decision made by the other party poses harm. This style is often used with issues of
routine or when quick decisions are necessary (Rahim, 2002).
Avoiding
Avoiding style (both low concern for self and others) is often used when the dysfunction
caused by approaching the conflict outweighs the benefits of any possible conflict solution. It is
often looked at as withdrawal or side-stepping of the situation. It can be used to deal with trivial
or minor issues or when one needs to retreat before a complex issue can be effectively addressed
(Rahim, 2002).
Compromising
Compromising style (both moderate concern for self and others) most associates with a
give and take approach, whereas both parties choose to forego something in order to make a
mutually agreed upon decision that benefits the whole. When the goals of the conflicting parties
are similar and negotiation had nulled decision, this style may be useful. It is often used when
agreement cannot be reached, temporary solution to a complex problem is eminent, or other
conflict management approaches have been found ineffective (Rahim, 2002).
Case Study #1
Conflict by Unintentional Design
It was Mikes first day on the job as a sales rep in a more remote rural area, having just
recently transferred from a larger, more well-known organization in the big city. Mike was
highly successful at his previous location, breaking sales records and bringing a number of
innovative project ideas to the firm. While Mike was viewed as a key ingredient to success at his
former agency, he was feeling detached and thinned out in the larger environment. He instead
wanted to bring his skills and enthusiasm to a smaller setting where he could feel more
connected to his co-workers and clients.
As he entered the door to his new office, he was half-heartedly greeted by his two new
officemates, Joe and Kathy. Smugly spouting out New guys here while avoiding direct eye
contact, Joe was actually sitting in what would be Mikes chair, with his feet on the desk while
bouncing a ball back and forth off the wall. While Kathy was sitting in her appropriate office
chair, she also circumvented a suitable greeting as she continued to tap on her keyboard, only
adding in a sarcastic tone, Our savior has arrived.

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

19

Before even getting a chance to put his things down, Mike wondered if he had just
walked into a bad first impression prank or if this was the actual antithesis of a true welcome
wagon. Sadly the latter, Mike politely questioned the reason for such statements before even
getting a chance to offer proper handshakes and hellos on his own behalf. While still bouncing
the ball and looking away, Joe retorted, Youve been really built up as the next big thing around
here, so I guess well see. Kathy turned around with something in hand and said, Oh I almost
forgot, heres your new employee welcome card.
Thinking perhaps he just got an unlucky draw in the worst possible office with the worst
possible colleagues, Mike opened the card with hopes of seeing some friendlier sentiments on
this inaugural work day. However, as soon as he turned the card his eyes veered to yet another
flippant comment from someone else he hadnt yet met. In bold blue ink it read, I hope you
have a strong back, youre going to need it, Sincerely, Evan. Feeling even more deflated, Mike
immediately left the office and made his way down the hall to where Roger was located, the
regional director who elatedly hired him after being extremely impressed with his resume and
interview.
Before getting the first word in regards to his unsavorily received arrival, Roger visibly
lit up as he saw Mike, extending a hand and enthusiastically proclaiming, Were so lucky to
have you here Mike! Ive told the whole crew all about you and I hope youre as excited to be
here as we are to have you! Feeling a proverbial mountain of epic proportions to climb after not
even logging in a full hour on the first day in a brand new setting, Mike simply stated, Yeah,
about all thatwe need to talk.
From Principle to Practice:
Additional questions for the reader: Whats next?
-Where does it appear that the initial relational conflict seeds were planted and what triggers can
be detected from the interactions between Mike and his new colleagues/supervisor?
-What are some things Mike could have said or done differently during the initial interactions
with his new officemates, in an effort to better address and/or resolve some of the initial conflict?
-Grasping that it appeared Mikes hiring supervisor had inadvertently put a target on Mikes
back before he even started, how could Joe or Kathy have handled the situation differently (in an
effort to best diffuse or buffer the preliminary conflict)?
-Realizing that now he is dealing with a potential set up to fail mission, rooted in complex
relational conflict issues in a new setting, how do you feel Mike should proceed with both his
new supervisor and co-workers?

Case Study #2
To Grieve or Not to Grieve

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

20

Martin, a compliance director for the past 5 years at a social service agency, also acts in
the capacity of hearing officer for personnel grievances that are filed within the organization. He
has just received a complaint from Ryan, who is accusing direct supervisor Lisa of creating a
hostile work environment for him, both personally and professionally. Ryan reported that issues
began at an annual first aid and CPR training, as he and Lisa were paired up as partners to work
on health/safety techniques for certification renewal.
The claim from Ryan was that during the Heimlich maneuver portion of the training, Lisa
forcefully pulled on his abdomen, rather than gently going through the motions as the training
manual instructed. Ryan indicated that immediately after the painful move occurred he firmly
asked Lisa to Let go, to which she reportedly replied, Oh come on that didnt hurt did it? Are
you a man or a baby? Ryan admitted that while he felt it was far too aggressive and caused
considerable discomfort, he also felt awkwardly threatened by her follow up comments as both a
female and person in an authority position over him. The demeaning comment which appeared
to question his masculinity, prompted him to then play it off like it was no big deal for the
duration of the training. Later on in the day however, he felt very uneasy and conflicted by what
had occurred. Along with still experiencing some moderate rib discomfort he felt as though it
was not appropriate to allow those demeaning comments to be said without some type of follow
up.
Deciding to formally address the situation, but still feeling uncomfortable about
approaching Lisa directly, Ryan instead went to Martin to detail the complaint and file a
grievance. Martin first advised Ryan to see a physician in order to assess any potential injury, as
a worker compensation claim would have to be pursued and ruled out per agency policy.
Additionally, Martin informed Ryan that per the claims, an investigation would have be
completed because of the accusation of harassment.
Ryan kept to himself about the details over the next few days, but an ensuing
investigation amongst the division caused a grapevine stir. This prompted some other members
in the division to begin gossiping whisperings of sissy and snitch, in regards to Ryan. While
Ryan stated Lisa didnt continue to openly belittle him about the situation, he felt as though she
was now holding a grudge and using passive aggressive tactics along with her position of power
to impact his role within the organization. Lisa had previously been very impressed with Ryans
contributions as a fellow committee member, assigning him to work with her on a decorated task
force. However, Ryan now claimed that during meetings she would surreptitiously shoot down
his ideas and in subtle fashion began to assign more of the cumbersome, undesirable process
oriented requirements of the tasks to him.
As a type of insult to injury, the course of the investigation and subsequent ruling of a
decision appeared to be taking longer than feasibly necessary in Ryans eyes. He was growing
weary from feeling as if he was in a purgatory of unresolved conflict, now just wanting to be
done with the lengthy, drawn out process. Ultimately, Martin determined that there was a
purported lack of justifiable evidence, coupled with inconclusive findings. After all was said and
done, the situation ended in an unsubstantiated complaint with mere coaching forms for each
employee as a type of re-in servicing on adhering to appropriate and respectable boundaries
within the workplace.

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

21

Feeling a lack of support from what he viewed as a politically skewed ruling, Ryan is
now questioning if he did the right thing at his own sacrificial expense. While resigning has
crossed his mind, he feels strongly that he should not have to re-locate for attempting to address
an uncomfortable situation in a professional manner. He considers taking the complaint even
higher up the ladder, but questions at what expense as he just wants to do his job as a
contributing team member without any ongoing conflict.
From Principle to Practice:
Additional points and questions for the reader (What next?)
-What next steps would you take if you found yourself in Ryans current position?
-What would you have possibly done differently as Ryan from the onset of his concerns, in order
to attempt to resolve the conflict in an interest based manner?
-How could the hearing officer/compliance director have potentially handled this situation
differently, in order to achieve a more collaborative result?
-What conflict theory previously reviewed within the text most comes to mind when reflecting
upon this scenario? Why?
Conclusion
The classic impression of conflict, and even the word conflict itself, typically conjures up
notions of negativity. Conversely, leading experts in the fields of leadership and management
coupled with years of research grounded in empirical findings have helped to disabuse
practitioners of this predisposed belief. What is reasonable to assert, is that the ideas and
implications of both teamwork and conflict are inexorably synonymous with one another. With
regard to this unescapable connection, personalized views and collective decisions will
ultimately determine how these two concepts will transect.
Consequently, results and outcomes of the teaming process are contingent upon a variety
of factors. The level of involvement from leadership, geographical distribution of team
members, technological resources, and other mediums with which members have to work within,
can all heavily define a teams level of success. While the potential threat of non-productive
conflict and other dysfunctional behaviors can thwart team progress at any level, there are a
number of ways in which teams can best recognize and address these risks. Along with
providing an overview and specific examples applicable to work in teams, this chapter also offers
best practice methods for the purposes of assessing, addressing and resolving team conflict.

Key Words
Conflict
Bargaining
Task Conflict
Process Conflict
Conflict Resolution
Conflict Management
Destructive
Conflict Theory
Constructive
Relationship Conflict

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

22

References
Abelson, M. A., & Baysinger, B. D. (1984). Optimal and dysfunctional turnover: Toward an
organizational level model. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 331-341.
Allan, K. (2007). Chapter 7: Conflict and Critical Theories. The Social Lens: An Invitation to
Social and Sociological Theory. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/upmdata/13636_Chapter7.pdf
Anderson, C. & Kilduff, G. J. (2009). Why Do Dominant Personalities Attain
Influence in Face-to-Face Groups? The Competence-Signaling Effects of Trait
Dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96 (2), 491-503.
Ayoko, O. B., Konrad, A. M., & Boyle, M.V. (2012). Online Work: Managing
Conflict and Emotions for Performance in Virtual Teams. ESCP, European Management
Journal, 30, 156-174.
Bradley, B. H., Postlethwaite, B. E., Klotz, A. C., Hamdani, M. R., & Brown, K. G. (2012).
Reaping the Benefits of Task Conflict in Teams: The Critical Role of Team Psychological
Safety Climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 151.
Cooper, C. L., & Cartwright, S. (1994). Healthy Mind; Healthy OrganizationA Proactive
Approach to Occupational Stress. Human relations, 47(4), 455-471.
Curseu, P. L., & Schruijer, S. G. (2010). Does Conflict Shatter Trust or Does Trust Obliterate
Conflict? Revisiting the Relationships Between Team Diversity, Conflict, and Trust.
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 14(1), 66.
De Dreu, C. K. W. & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2001). Managing Relationship Conflict and the
Effectiveness of Organizational Teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
22(3), 309328. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224867362?
accountid=27424
De Dreu, C. & Weingart, L. (2003). A Contingency Theory of Task Conflict and Performance in
Groups and Organizational Teams. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds),
International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.
Retrieved from
https://blackboard.fhsu.edu/courses/1/LDRS807_VA_U2014/db/_5911130_1/Internationa
l_Handbook_of_Organizational_Teamwork_and_Cooperative_Working.pdf
De Dreu, C. K. (2006). When Too Little or Too Much Hurts: Evidence for a Curvilinear
Relationship Between Task Conflict and Innovation in Teams. Journal of Management,
32(1), 83-107.

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

23

Desivilya, H. S., & Yagil, D. (2005). The Role of Emotions in Conflict Management: The Case
of Work Teams. International Journal of Conflict Management, 16(1), 55-69.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/199026164?accountid=27424
Dijkstra, M. T., Beersma, B., & Evers, A. (2011). Reducing Conflict-Related Employee Strain:
The benefits of an Internal Locus of Control and a Problem-Solving Conflict
Management Strategy. Work & Stress, 25(2), 167-184.
Dijkstra, M., Beersma, B., & Cornelissen, R. A. (2012). The Emergence of the Activity Reduces
Conflict Associated Strain (ARCAS) Model: A Test of a Conditional Mediation Model of
Workplace Conflict and Employee Strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
17(3), 365.
Driskell, J. E., Salas, E., Goodwin, G.F., OShea, P.G. (2006). What
Makes a Good Team Player? Personality and Team Effectiveness. American
Psychological Association: Group Dynamic, Theory, Research and Practice, 10(4),
249-271.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
European Agency for Safety, & Health at Work. (2007). Lighten the Load: Good Practice
Awards 2007: Call for Nominations. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work.
Franks, D. M., Davis, R., Bebbington, A. J., Ali, S. H., Kemp, D., & Scurrah, M. (2014). Conflict
Translates Environmental and Social Risk into Business Costs. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 111(21), 7576-7581.
Han, G. H., & Harms, P. D. (2010). Team Identification, Trust and Conflict: A Mediation Model.
International Journal of Conflict Management, 21(1), 20-43.
Hinds, P. J. & Bailey, D. E. (2003). Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in
Distributed Teams. Organization Science, 14(6), 615-632.
Jehn, K. A. & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A
Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 44(2), 238-251
Korinek, A. W., & Kimball, T. G. (2003). Managing and Resolving Conflict in the Supervisory
System. Contemporary Family Therapy, 25(3), 295-310.

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

24

Korsgaard, M. A., Schweiger, D. M., & Sapienza, H. J. (1995). Building Commitment,

Attachment, and Trust in Strategic Decision-Making Teams: The Role of Procedural
Justice. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 60-84.
Langfred, C. W., & Moye, N. (2014). Does Conflict Help or Hinder Creativity in Teams? An
Examination of Conflicts Effects on Creative Processes and Creative Outcomes.
International Journal of Business and Management, 9(6), 30.
Ma, Z. L., Chih-Cheng, & Tanev, S. (2012). The New Product Development Team
Conflict: Insights from Cultural Diversity and Geographical Dispersion. Innovative
Marketing, 8(3).
Miller, K. (2003) Organizational Communication: Approaches and Processes. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth, a Division of Thompson Learning, Inc.
Miranda, S. M., & Bostrom, R. P. (1994). The Impact of Group Support Systems on Group
Conflict and Conflict Management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(3),
63. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/218973117?
accountid=27424
Olaniran, B. A. (2010). Group Communication and Conflict Management in an Electronic
Medium. International Journal of Conflict Management, 21(1), 44-69. Retrieved
from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10444061011016623
PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
111(21), May 27, 2014. pp. 7576-7581.
Quick, J. C., Quick, J. D., Nelson, D. L., & Hurrell Jr, J. J. (1997). Preventive Stress
Management in Organizations. American Psychological Association.
Rahim, M. A. (2002). Toward a Theory of Managing Organizational Conflict. International
Journal of Conflict Management, 13(3), 206-235. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/199034363?accountid=27424
Shaw, J. D., Zhu, J., Duffy, M. K., Scott, K. L., Shih, H. A., & Susanto, E. (2011). A Contingency
Model of Conflict and Team Effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 391400.
Speakman, J., & Ryals, L. (2010). A Re-Evaluation of Conflict Theory for the Management of
Multiple, Simultaneous Conflict Episodes. International Journal of Conflict
Management, 21(2), 186-201. Retrieved http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10444061011037404
Shrivastava, S. & Shrivastava, P. (2012). Rainbow Workforce

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

25

Exploring the Macro Contributors of cross cultural Conflicts in Global Multicultural

Business Organizations. International Journal of Human Resources Management and
Research, 2(4), 59-66.
Thompson, L. (2011). Making the Team: A Guide for Managers. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Tomai, M., Mebane, M.E., Rosa, V., Ingravalle, V., Benedetti, M., (2013). Do Virtual Groups
Experience Less Conflict than Traditional Teams? 3rd World Conference on Innovation
and Computer Science. Academic World Education & Research Information Technology
& Computer Science (AWERProcedia), 4, 926-938.
Van Kleef, G. A. (2009). How Emotions Regulate Social Life: The Emotions as Social
Information (EASI) Model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 184-188.
Wageman, R., Hackman, J. R., & Lehman, E. (2005). Team Diagnostic Survey Development of
an Instrument. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(4), 373-398.
Walsh, A. (2012). Chapter 6: Critical Theories: Marxist, Conflict, and Feminist. Criminology:
The Essentials. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/43449_6.pdf
Walton, R. E. (1969). Interpersonal Peacemaking: Confrontations and Third-Party Consultation
(Vol. 1). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Distribution of Duties
Charles Lindberg
Introduction
Learning objectives
Psychology of conflict
Understanding the difference between constructive and destructive conflict within teams
Early perspective of team conflict
Understanding conflict as it relates to team dynamics
Root causes for three types of conflict
Impact of conflict on type of team
Team culture
Inter-culture
Team member personalities
Understanding the dynamics of conflict in brick and mortar teams
Understanding the dynamics of conflict in virtual teams
Project manager-chapter assembly, revisions, final edits

Amy Gade

Chapter 5 * Conflict Within Teams

Current perspective of team conflict

Understand best practice ways to assess, address, and resolve team conflicts for success
Avoiding/minimizing team conflict
Adoption of guidelines/principles
Conflict management
Organizational learning and effectiveness
Needs of stakeholders
Ethics
Styles of dealing with conflict
Factors influencing the conflict management process
Personal factors
Relational factors
Cultural factors
Location factors
Effectively assessing team conflict
Resolving team conflict
Integrating
Obliging
Dominating
Avoiding
Compromising
Understanding various conflict theories as they apply to work in teams
Punctuation/Grammatical proofing
Chapter format proofing
Matthew Smoot
The impact on work team effectiveness
Productivity
Implications specific to team members
Work team effectiveness
Overall implications for organizations
Monetary costs to company
2 case studies
Proof reading/editing
APA formatting
Conclusion

26