CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

7. WORKPLACE AGGRESSION AND CONFLICT 223
as research in this domain proceeded, it became clear that less severe forms
of aggression occur far more regularly at work. Scholars drew from research
and theory on human aggression in many domains (e.g., social psychology,
family violence, and criminology) and began to explore the factors that predict
workplace aggression (Barling, 1996; Baron & Neuman, 1996; Neuman
& Baron, 1996). A second stream of literature that developed simultaneously,
predominantly in Europe, focused on workplace bullying (or mobbing) and
its negative consequences for employees who are subjected to aggressive acts
over a period of time (Einarsen et al., 1994; Leymann, 1996). These include
posttraumatic stress disorder, job loss, and even permanent exclusion from
the job market (e.g., Davenport, Schwartz, & Elliott, 2002; Leymann, 1996).
Because these studies show that experiencing aggression has negative effects,
there have been few discussions of how workplace aggression may have
positive outcomes. A few authors have argued that although aggression may
harm the direct target, there may be second-order positive effects for others in
the social context or for the organization (e.g., Bies & Tripp, 2005; Bies, Tripp,
& Kramer, 1997; Warren, 2003). Still, most research on workplace aggression
continues to focus on negative outcomes.
In contrast, conflict can produce positive benefits and there has been
a strong emphasis upon constructive aspects of conflict in organizations
(De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997). Managers and practitioners have long
been encouraged to stimulate “functional” conflict in their organizations,
such as task-related debates and discussions to motivate change (e.g., Robbins,
1978). Although it is recognized that conflict can have negative outcomes,
particularly if based upon personality disagreements (discussed
in more detail in the following section), one of the most important recent
contributions of the conflict literature has been to enhance understanding
of the conditions under which conflict exerts positive outcomes (e.g., De
Dreu, 1997; Jehn, 1995; Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
Task Versus Relationship Focus
One distinction between the conflict and aggression literatures deals
with the nature of the incompatibility between the parties. Conflict scholars
distinguish between conflicts about people’s relationships (i.e., relationship
conflict) and conflicts about the task (i.e., task conflicts; Amason, 1996; De
Dreu & Weingart, 2003; Jehn, 1995, 1997; Pinkley, 1990; Wall & Nolan, 1986).
Relationship conflict has been proposed to be negative for the parties and
the group context in which they occur, whereas task conflict can stimulate
a productive and innovative group and thus have positive consequences.
The positive effects of task conflict have been questioned in a recent metaanalysis
(De Dreu & Weingart, 2003), yet the available evidence supports
the distinction between task- and relationship-based conflict.
In contrast, aggression involves the intent to harm another party, which
the other party is motivated to avoid, and thus aggression is a form of