Anda di halaman 1dari 14

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research

© Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing association

Review Article ISSN 2229 – 3795

Types, Sources, Costs & Consequences of Workplace Conflict

Muhammad K. Riaz1 , Fatima A. Junaid2


1
MS Scholar, Institute of Management Sciences (IMSciences), Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan , Email: raqi148.imsc@yahoo.com
2
Assistant Professor, Institute of Management Sciences (IMSciences), Peshawar, Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

ABSTRACT

Workplace conflict is an inevitable phenomenon of organizational life. This study critically


analyzed the types and sources of conflict at four levels: intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup,
and intergroup; with relation to different organizational phenomena. Costs of the conflict to all
parties (employee, organization and customers) in qualitative and qualitative terms are analyzed.
The consequences of conflict are also summarized. It was concluded that conflict should be
studied using more content rich and diversified methods like in-depth interviews, case studies
(phenomenological studies), and focused group discussions as well as through longitudinal
studies. Because on survey based studies are not sufficient to get the holistic picture of
workplace conflict. Future directions are also discussed.

Keywords: Conflict, Interpersonal Conflict, Conflict Sources, Conflict Costs

1. Introduction
Workplace conflict is an omnipresent organizational phenomenon. It is a major theme of
occupational/ social psychology and organizational behavior (De Dreu, 2008). A group of
organizational researchers (for example Watson & Haffman, 1996; Wall & Callister, 1995;
Thomas & Schmidt, 1976; Rizzo, House & Lirtzman, 1970) opined that conflict is terrible,
damaging and destructive to organization and to employees as well. It plunders the quality of
group decision making; reduces creativity and innovation, mess up team success, reduces trust
among employees (Jehn, 1994, 1995; & Amason, 1996). It was tagged as disturbing force
(Waltson, 1969). Therefore, in their opinion, conflict should be eradicated. The other group of
researchers (for review Tjosvold, 1998) argued that conflict may be constructive and beneficial.
It can contribute significantly to organization efficiency (Tjosvold, 1986a, 1986b, 2003; & De
Deru & Van de Veliert, 2001). Harmonious, peaceful, cooperative groups are prone to become
static, indifferent and non-responsive to changes, creativity and innovation (De Deru & Van de
Veliert, 2001). Riaz & Junaid (Forthcoming) concluded that workplace conflict is neither all
together bad nor beneficial rather its nature, parties involved, circumstances, and other related
variables decide that either it is productive or counterproductive.

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2004302


This study, tried to summarize and discuss the types, causes, costs and consequences of
workplace conflict analytically.

2. Workplace Conflict
There is no one agreed upon definition of workplace conflict as there are conflicts about the
definition of conflict (Tjosvold, 2008). According to Pondy (1967) conflict emerges when one
party perceives that its goals, values or views are being indulged by inter-reliant counterparts
(Wall & Callister, 1995; Thomas, 1992). While others (De Deru & Gelfand, 2007; Deutch,
1973;& Kelley & Thibaut, 1969) opined that workplace conflict may arise because of scare
resources (for example time, status, budgets), values (such as political preferences, beliefs,
religion, moral, social values), personality differences, misinterpreted facts, perceptions, world
views and may be due any combination of these.
According to Rahim (2010), workplace conflict can be categorized on many bases; hence there
are many types of it.
2.1 Affective Conflict
When two entities - individual, groups, organization - while trying to solve a problem together,
become aware that their feelings and emotions are incompatible (cf. Guetzkow & Gyr, 1954; &
Amason, 1996). It was also named as relationship conflict (Jehn, 1997a), as emotional conflict
(Pelled, Eisenhardt, & Xin, 1999; & Schermerhorn, Hung, & Obsborn, 2002). Pelled et al.
(1999) defined this as “a situation in which group members have interpersonal clashes
characterized by anger, frustration and other negative feelings”. While according to
Schermerhorn et al (2002) “ it involves interpersonal difficulties that arises over feeling of anger,
mistrust, dislike, fear, resentment and the like”.
This type of conflict is negatively associated with affective reactions, and has a positive relation
with turn over intentions. It decreases employees’ satisfaction and psychological well-being
(Medina, Munduate, Dorado, Martinez, & Guerra, 2005).

2.2 Substantive Conflict


This type of conflict emerges when organizational members disagree on their tasks or job content
issues (Guetzkow & Gyr, 1954). It was also called as task conflict (Jehn, 1997; Pelled et al.,
1999) as cognitive conflict (Amason, 1996). Pelled et al. (1999) define is as “a situation in
which group members disagree about task issues; like goals, key decision areas, procedures and
the appropriate choice for actions”. According to Jehn (1997b) task conflict is a disagreement
among group members’ ideas and opinions about the course of action to be chosen for the
specific task.

Affective conflict arises due to incongruence of feelings and/ or emotions while substantive
conflict is connected with incompatibilities in job duties and responsibilities of the conflicting
parties.

Along with theses two main type of conflict there are many other types of workplace conflict.
Like conflict of interest. It is a conflict in which each of the parties, sharing same understanding
of the circumstances, prefers a different rather incompatible solution to a problem (Rahim, 2001).
While according to Zechmeister and Druckman (1973), the conflict in which parties perceives
themselves as representative of their groups (in-groups); fighting for group not for the self; are
likely to be more harmful and pitiless than those who are fighting for personal gains. Another

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2004302


type is conflict of values - when two social entities differ in their values or ideologies on certain
issues; it results in conflict of values (Druckman, Broome & Korper, 1998). While in role
conflict, a role occupant is required to perform two or more roles that are in-congruent, opposing
or even mutually exclusive activities (Rahim, 2010). According to Pandey & Kurmar (1997), “it
is a state of mind or experience or perception of the role incumbent arising out of the
simultaneous occurrence of two or more role expectations such that compliance with one would
make compliance with other(s) more difficult or even impossible”.

3. Sources of Workplace Conflict


As there are four level of analysis of conflict (Rahim, 2010): intrapersonal, interpersonal,
intragroup and intergroup. So sources are of four types as well.

3.1 Sources of Intra-personal and Role Conflicts


Sources of intra-personal conflicts are mainly hierarchical and structural (Rahim, 2010). Two
main sources are mal-assignment and goal in-congruence; and inappropriate demand on
capacity. Mal-assignment means when an employee is assigned a task for which he does not
have the appropriate expertise, aptitude and commitment; the person may experience qualitative
role overload which results to the role conflict (Argyris, 1973). While inappropriate demand on
capacity means that an employee can not properly satisfy all the demands of his position even by
working at the maximum capacity, this lead to quantitative role overload (Rahim, 2010; and
Argyris, 1973) or his / her capacity (skills, aptitude, and commitment) exceeds position demands,
he find the position non-challenging. Inadequate role demand and under load role is a common
problem of young graduates. They often find their jobs not as challenging as they were told
(Newton and Keenan, 1987).

Personality is studied in relation to conflict in several ways. McAdams (1996) argues that
individual differences in personality can be described at three levels: what a person has (traits of
a person labeled as level –I), what a person does (contextually influenced strategies, goals, and
concerns – level II), and how the person makes his or her experiences (life narratives – level III).
In these three levels of differences, certain traits (level I) are related to conflict specific motives
while certain behaviors (level II) are related with conflict. Like agreeableness is associated with
motives to maintain harmonious social relationship, which influence conflict related behaviors
(Jansen-Campbell and Graziano, 2001).

The structure of an organization has a major influence on role conflict (cf. Kahn, 1964).
Organization generates a high degree of role conflict by creating conflicting goals, policies, and
decisions (Rahim, 2010). Analysis of structural variables such as formalization, supervisory span,
work group size, span of subordination, functional interdependence and participation represents
significant basis of influence on the both, role conflict and role ambiguity (Morris, Streers and
Koch, 1979; and Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman, 1970). Management style may also generate role
conflict. According to Rizzo et al.(1970), role conflict and vagueness tend to be lower under
conditions in which superiors are more frequently engaging in emphasizing production under
conditions of uncertainty, providing structure and standards, facilitating teamwork, tolerating
freedom, and exerting upward influence”. Formalization, supervisory supportiveness, and team
orientation are negatively related to role conflict (House & Rizzo, 1972).

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


3.2 Sources of Interpersonal Conflict
Conflict threatens one’s self esteem and impacts negatively all physiological systems in ways
like accelerated hear beat and increased muscle tensions (McEwen, 1998). According to De
Deru, Dierendonck and Dijikstra (2004), “stress at workplace is seen as an antecedent to
interpersonal conflict, affecting well-being negatively and employees with low well-being may
trigger conflict with colleagues who are more prone for such conflict due to poor performance”.
According to Khan and Haque (2009), interpersonal conflict with colleagues is significantly
related to personal outcomes (self esteem, general well being, emotional exhaustion), while
interpersonal conflicts with superiors is significantly related to organizational outcomes such as
job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intentions and real turnover. According to
social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), self categorization theory (Tajfel, 1981), and similarity
– attractiveness prospective (Byrne, 1971) interpersonal conflicts arises from social identity
issues like prejudice towards out group, feeling of superiority, hidden inclination of serving in-
group at the expense of out group(s) (De Dreu and Gelfand, 2008). According to Spector's
(1998) emotion – centered model of job stress, actual conflict which may be caused by many
factors, may results in perceived interpersonal conflict or vise versa. Job stressors bring out
emotional reactions and subsequent strains which lead to perceived interpersonal conflict or
actual conflict.
Emotions
Actual Perceived Anger Strains
Conflict Interpersonal Anxiety Behavioral
Conflict Frustration Physical
Psychologica
l
Moderators
Control
Locus of Control
Negative Affectivity
Type A Personality
Trait Anger

Figure 01: Emotion Centered Model of Job Stress (Adopted from Spector,1998)

3.3 Sources of Intragroup Conflict


Different types of conflict emerge at different stages of group work (Jehn and Mannix, 2001).
Leadership style can virtually influence all conflict generating variables in an group (Rahim,
2010). There are three situations regarding leaders and subordinates in a group/ organization. In
first, leader treats group members differently. The aggrieved member may be in conflict with
favored members. In second situation group members unit against its leader: May be because he
changes jobs descriptions, schedules, rules and regulation; remove some incentives; and /or
impose some sanctions. Members may perceive these actions unfair and/ or biased; and may
resist to these changes which may generate conflicts. In the third situation, members form sub

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


groups. Difference on postings, in group – out group bias, differences in opinions of the sub
groups may lead to intra group conflicts (Maier and Verser, 1982).

Task structure represents the extent to which the task is simple/ routine or complex/ non routine
(Jehn et al., 1999). According to Jehn et al (1999) and Pelled et al (1999), task structure leads to
task conflict which is positively related to performance. If groups are performing routine task
then performance may be affected negatively and in case of non –routine and complex task the
performance will be improved.

When group are composed of individuals with diverse interpersonal communication styles,
attitudes, values, and interests; then there are greater possibilities that its members will have
opposing perspective toward group and organizational goals (Rahim, 2010). According to an
empirical study of Rahim (1979), intragroup conflict is significantly less in homogenous groups
than heterogeneous groups. The increasing trend of having female; followers of different
religions; people of different ethnic background, different educational background, age groups
(generations); and the move from formal hierarchal organization to self managing team based
organizations, prompt the researchers and management to consider diversity of the workforce
because it may results in generation of conflict (Mohammad and Angell, 2004; Heneman, Judge
and Heneman, 1999; Lawler, Mohrman and Ledford, 1995). A classical, functional organization
cannot cope with changing corporate world complex problems; which lead organizations towards
project teams, matrix structure and cross functional teams and these ways of organizing involved
hiring of people with different ethnic, social and information backgrounds (Janssens and Steyaert,
2003; Jehn, Northcraft, and Neale, 1999). However, these teams have their own internal
problems (Jehn, 1995). Because of theses problems, there are chances of intragroup conflicts.

3.4 Sources of Intergroup Conflict


The sources of intergroup conflicts are structural in nature mostly, such as organizational
hierarchy, span of control, and centralization of power (Bornstein, 2003). Complex organization
used to develop differentiated systems to accomplish overall organizational objectives.
Differentiated sub systems develop distinct functions, objectives, and norms. These sub systems
compete with one another for resources, power, and status (Bornstein, 2003; and Lawerance and
Lorsch, 1967a). According to Lawerance and Lorsch (1967b) that subsystems develop different
types of internal structures (the formality of structures and time, goal, and interpersonal
orientation) to respond their relevant sub environment. This heterogeneity leads to inter
departmental conflict (Lawerance and Lorsch, 1967a).

According to Spender and Kessler (1995), there are three categories of interdependences namely:
(1) pooled interdependence - where groups are relatively independent of each other, but continue
to work for the attainment of organization’s goal, (2) sequential interdependence – where the
output of one unit becomes the input of another unit in line, and (3) reciprocal interdependence
– where the outputs of one group become the input of other groups, in any direction. Sequential
and reciprocal interdependences are the major sources of inter group conflict. Potentials for
intergroup conflict exist when two units (groups or departments) depend upon a common pool of
scare organizational resources such as physical space, equipment, manpower, operating funds,
capital funds, central staff resources, and centralized services (Walton and Dutton, 1969).

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


Figure 02: Intergroup Conflict Model (Adopted from Walton and Dutton, 1969)

From the discussion it could be inferred that conflict typology is a multivariate, having different
bases like personality and the roles of conflicting parties; job duties, responsibilities,
communication and reporting lines; real or perceived disagreements, discomforts; interests and
many other variables. But irrespective of its source and type, organization has to make use of
conflict.

4. Costs of Conflict at Workplace


Unresolved conflict generates many serious consequences involving high financial and human
costs. Conflict may lead to frustration, tension, low morale, missing meeting deadlines, lack of
self confidence, low trust level, communication problems, absenteeism, and legal proceedings
(Buss, 2009). According to Levine (1998), costs of conflict comprises of: Direct cost – fees of
layers and other professionals; productivity cost – value of lost time / opportunity cost;
continuity cost – loss of ongoing relationship; and emotional cost – the pain of being held by
emotions. Dana (2001) identified eight hidden costs of conflict: wastage of time, bad quality of
decisions made, loss of skilled employees, restructuring inefficiencies, lowered job motivation,
disruption, absenteeism, and health costs (Riaz, 2010).

Buss (2009:21) divided cost of conflict at workplace in three categories: cost to organization,
cost to employees, and cost to clients.

4.1 Cost of Conflict to the Organization


Mismanaged conflict affects productivity (Cram and MacWilliams, 2009). Different studies
mentioned different proportion of time wasted in managing conflicts e.g. up to 20 percent
(Thomas and Scmidt, 1976); 42 percent (Watson and Hoffman, 1996). While according to a
large study of 5000 employees in European and North American countries, carried out by OPP

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


( an international psychology consultants in collaboration with UK based The Charter Institute of
Personnel & Development (CPID), work time wasted in dealing poorly managed conflicts ranges
from 0.9 hours to 3.3 hours per week (CIPD, 2008 as cited in Riaz, 2010).

Mishandled conflict affects employees’ health and wellbeing, which in turn results in
absenteeism. It is a habitual pattern of absence from duty or obligation (Johns, 2007). A high
correlation exists among absenteeism, job stress and needing a break from fighting with
colleagues (CFLSRI, 1998). Workplace conflict may also create a tendency of presenteeism. It
means showing up at work while ill or otherwise not completely fit for work. Due to
presenteeism productivity declines (Dana, 2001). Cost of absenteeism to organization is well
researched, occupational medicine begun to suggest that work lost due to presenteeism is only
the visible tip of an iceberg and that the hidden cost of presenteeism may be much greater” (Buss,
2009).

Researchers, who studied exit interview data on voluntary turn over, reported that unresolved
conflict is a influential factor in at least 50 percent of all such departures and that, it costs about
150 percent of one trained employee’s salary to replace him or her (Duxbury and Higgins, 2003).
While according to Dana (2001), conflict is the cause of 90 percent voluntary departures. The
amount of theft by employees and damage in a company has a positive correlation with level of
conflict in a company (Buss, 2009). Theft and damages costs 2 percent to a company of the staff
total cost (Dana, 2001).

4.2 Cost of Conflict to the Employee


Mismanaged and unresolved conflict causes stress, reduces confidence levels, makes employees
anxious, and frustrated. All these lead to lesser job satisfaction, humiliation, embarrassment, and
stressed; these induce psychological and physical diseases. The consequences of such
happenings disturbed employee’s family and friend as well (cf. McClure, 2000). The
consequences of such happenings disturb employee’s family and friend as well (Buss, 2009).
Employees involved in conflict, experience a break in their relations, and often feel alienated
from each other, become self centered. They adopt avoiding behaviors, and may harm each other
in many ways. Escalated conflict leads parties to shun contact, end communication, withheld
information or provide wrong information (Cram and McWilliams, 2009; Buss, 2009; Hart,
McDonald, and Rock, 2004 and CFLSRI, 1998). Presenteeism is also affecting employee
negatively as this may harm employee’s health, damage the quality of working life, and give
impression of uselessness at work (Buss, 2009).

4.3 Cost of Conflict to the Customers

Cost due to mishandled conflict to customer is not researched in depth. One among few studies is
of Buss (2009) which discussed it. According to him, workplace conflict affects the quality of
product or service. In hyper competitive industries, negative consequences of conflict is
considerable and it may tarnish the organization brand image and value positioning in the mind
of customers. Most of these costs are hidden and are very difficult to quantify. However, there
may be observable consequences like reduced motivation of staff leading to lower quality

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


products or service, or mistakes that can even threaten customer’s health and hence results in
legal suits and compensatory claims from customer (Buss, 2009; Riaz, 2010).

5. Consequences of Conflict at Workplace


A number of studies have attempted to relate conflicts to personal and organizational outcomes
(Dana, 2001). Consequences of role conflict are low job satisfaction, low confidence, low
organizational commitment, lack of job involvement, tension and anxiety plans to leave the job,
and inability to influence decisions (Rizzo, House and Lirtzman, 1970; Rahim, 2001; and
Jackson and Schuler, 1985).

According to Jehn (1995), a moderate level of substantive conflict is functional, as it encourages


discussion and debate, which help groups to attain a higher level of performance. According to
Jehn et al. (1999) and Bourgeois (1985), this type of conflict may approve group performance
through better understanding of different point of views and alternative solutions.

SOURCES CONSEQUENCES

Mis-assignment & Goal Low Morale


Incongruence Reduced Productivity
In-appropriate Demand on Excessive Employee Turnover
Capacity
Quality Problems
Personality Traits
Inability to meet deadlines
Organizational Structure
Increased Supervision Cost
Supervisory Style
Employee Theft and Damage
Induced Stress
Increasing Psychological
Emotional Exhaustion Problems
Lower Job Satisfaction Conflict
Decreasing Collaboration
Forced Turnover Un-desired Behaviors
Leadership Style Group Think
Task Structure Trust Deficit
Group Composition Fractioned Activities
Group Size Damaged Management
System Differentiation Credibility
Task Interdependence Dissatisfied Customer
Dependence on Scare Resources Diminishing Profits

Figure 03: Summary of Sources and Consequences of Workplace Conflict

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


6. Conclusion and Future Research Directions
From the discussion it can be concluded that conflict is an inevitable organizational phenomenon.
Its types, sources, costs and consequences are multi-dimensional. Therefore it is suggested that
conflict should be studied using more content rich and mixed methods (refer to critical realistic
approaches) like in-depth interviews, case studies (phenomenological studies), and focused
group discussions as well as through longitudinal studies. Because on survey based studies are
not sufficient to get the holistic picture of workplace conflict. Future directions are also
discussed.

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


References
Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on
strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of
Management Journal, 39:123-148

Argyris, C. (1973). Personality and Organization Theory Revisited. Administrative Science


Quarterly, 18:141-167

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc.

Bornstein, G. (2003). Intergroup Conflict: Individual, Groups, and Collective Interests.


Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7:129-145

Buss, H. (2009). Measuring and Reducing The Cost of Conflict at Workplace in UNHCR,
Unpublished master dissertation, Institut Universitaire Kurt Bosch, Switzerland

Byrne, D. (1971). The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press

CFLSRI. (1998). Absenteeism: Workplace Health System. Canadian Fitness and Life Style
Research Institute

Cram, J. A. & McWilliams, R. K. (2009). From Conflict to Opportunity: A Guide to


Understanding and Managing Workplace Conflict, Cramber River Consultant

Dana, D. (2001). Conflict Resolution, New York: McGraw-Hill

Dana, D. (2001). The Dana Measure of Financial Cost of Organizational Conflict, New York:
McGraw-Hill

De Dreu, C. K. W. , Dierendonck, Maria D. & Dijkstra, T.M. (2004). "Conflict at work and
individual well-being", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 15 Iss: 1, pp.6 – 26

De Dreu, C. K. W. (2008). The virtue and vice of workplace conflict: Food for (pessimistic)
thought. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 5–18.

De Dreu, C. K. W. & Van De Vilert, E. (2001). Using Conflict in Organization, London: Sage

De Dreu, C. K. W., & Gelfand, M. J. (2007). Conflict in the workplace: Sources, dynamics, and
functions across multiple levels of analysis” In C. K.W. De Dreu, & Gelfand, M.J. (Ed). The
Psychology of Conflict and Conflict Management in Organization, 3-54. London: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associate

Deutsch, M. (1973). The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes, New
Haven: Yale University Press

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


Druckman, D. , Broome, B.J. & Korper, S. H. (1988). Value differences and conflict resolution:
Facilitation or delinking? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32:489-510

Duxbury, L. & Higgins, C. (2003). Work Life Conflict in Canada in the New Millennium - A
Status Report. Healthy Community Division, Health Canada

Guetzkow, H; Gyr, J. (1954). An analysis of conflict in decision-making groups. Human


Relations, 7, 367-382

Heneman, H.G., Judge, T.A., & Heneman, R.L. (1999) Staffing Organizations. Boston, MA:
Irwin McGraw-Hill

House, R. J. & Rizzo, J. R. (1972). Role Conflict and Ambiguity as Critical variables in a model
of Organization Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,7:467-505

Janssens, M., & Steyaert, C. (2003). Theories of diversity within organization studies: Debates
and future trajectories. Paper presented at Economic Growth and Innovation in Multicultural
Environments (ENGIME) workshop

Jehn, K. (1994). Enhancing effectiveness: An Investigation of Advantages and Disadvantages of


Value-based Intragroup Conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 5:223–238

Jehn, K. (1995). A Multi-method Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup


Conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40:256–282.

Jehn, K. (1997a). A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions in Organizational


Groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42:530-557

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.

Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why Differences makes a Difference: A
Field Study of Diversity, Conflict, and Performance in Workgroups. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 44:741-763

Jehn, K.A. (1997b). To agree or not to agree: The effects of value congruence, individual
demographic dissimilarity, and conflict of workgroup outcomes. International Journal of
Conflict Management, 8:287-305

Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Agreeableness as a Moderator of


Interpersonal Conflict. Journal of Personality, 69:323-362

Johns, G. (2007). Absenteeism in Ritzer, G. (Ed). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology,


Blackwell Publishing

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1969). Group problem solving. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson
(Eds.), The handbook of social psychology. Vol. 4. Reading, Mass.: Addison- Wesley

Khan, A. M. Haque, A., (2009). Interpersonal Conflict with Colleagues and Superiors and Its
Differential Impact on Job Related Outcomes. The Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences,
17:80-95

Lawer, E.E.III, Mohrmsn, S.A., & Ledford Jr., G.E.(1995). Creating high performance
organizations: Practices and results of employee involvement and total quality management in
Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsh, J.W. (1967a). Differentiation and Integration in Complex
Organization. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 12:1-47

Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsh, J.W. (1967b). Organization and Environment. Irwin-Dorsey:
Homewood, IL

Levine, S. (1998). The many Costs of Conflict, in S. Levine (Ed), Getting to Resolution, San
Francisco: Barrett-Koehler

Maier, N. R. F. & Verser, G.C. (1982). Psychology in Industrial Organization (5th Ed), Boston:
Houghton Mifflin

McAdams, D. P. (1996). Personality, Modernity and Storied Self: A Contemporary Framework


for Studying Persons. Psychological Inquiry, 7:295-321

McEwen, B. S.(1998). Protective and Damaging Effects of Stress Mediators. Seminar in


Medicine of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 338: 171-179

Medina, J. F., Munduate L., Dorado, A. M., Martinez, I., & Guerra, M. J. (2005). Types of
Intragroup conflict and affective reactions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20: 219-230

Mohammad, S, & Angell, L.C. (2004). Surface and deep level diversity in workgroups:
Examining the moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25:1015-1039

Morris, J. H., Steers, R.M., & Koch, J. L. (1979). Influence of Organization Structure on Role
Conflict and Ambiguity for three Occupational Grouping. The Academy of Management Journal,
22:58-71

Newton, T. J., & Keenan, A. (1987). Role Stress Reexamined: An Investigation of Role Stress
Predictor. Organizational Behavior and Human Processes, 40:346-368

Pandey, S., & Kumar, E. S. (1997). Development of a measure of role conflict. International
Journal of Conflict Management, 8:187-215

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M. , & Xin K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of
work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 44:1-28
Pondy, L. (1967), Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 17, pp. 296– 320.

Rahim, M.A. (1979). The Management of Intra-organizational Conflict: A laboratory Study with
Organization Design. Management International Review, 19:97-106

Rahim, M.A. (2010).Managing Conflict in Organization (3rd ed).London: Quorum Books.

Riaz, M. K. (2010). "Workplace Conflict: An overview and analysis" Unpublished MBA


Dissertation, Institute of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan

Riaz, M.K., & Junaid, F.A. (Forthcoming). Workplace Conflict: Constructive or Destructive.
African Journal of Business Management

Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J. & Lirtzman, S.I. (1970). Role Conflict and Ambiguity in Complex
Organizations. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 15(2):150-163

Schermerhorn, R. J(Jr), Hunt G.,& Osborn .(2002).Organizational Behavior”, (7ed), Wiley

Spector, P. E. (1998). A control theory of the job stress process. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories
of organizational stress (pp. 153–169). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Spender, J. C. & Kessler, E. H. (1995). Managing the Uncertainties of Innovation: Extending


Thompson (1967). Human Relations,48:35-56

Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.

Thomas, K. W. & Schmidt, W. H. (1976). A Survey of Managerial Interests with Respect to


Conflict. The Academy of Management Journal, 19: 315-318

Thomas, W.K. (1992). Conflict & Conflict Management: Reflections and Updates. Journal of
Organizational Behavior. 13:265-274

Tjosvold D. (1998). Comparative and Competitive goal approach to Conflict: Accomplishments


and Challenges. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47:285-342

Tjosvold, D. (1986a). Dynamics of Interdependence, Human Relations, 39:517-540

Tjosvold, D. (1986b). Working Together to get Things Done, Boston: Lexington

Tjosvold, D. (2008). The Conflict-Positive Organization: It depends upon us. Journal of


Organizational Behavior, 29:19-28

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


Wall, J., & Callister, R. (1995). Conflict and its management. Journal of Management, 21: 515-
558

Walton R. E. & Dutton J. M. (1969). The Management of Interdepartmental Conflict: A model


and Review. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14(1):73-84

Walton, R. (1969). Managing Conflict, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley

Watson, C. & Hoffman, L. R. (1996). Managers as Negotiators: A Test of Power versus Gender
as Predictor of Feelings, behavior and Outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(1):63-85

Zechmeister, K. & Druckman, D. (1973). Determinants of resolving a conflict of interest: A


simulation of political decision-making. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 17:63-88

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Anda mungkin juga menyukai