CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

1. CONFLICT IN THE WORKPLACE 23
sus threat of their social identity. Work by Jehn and Mannix (2001) showed
that different types of conflict (e.g., relationship, task, process) emerge at
different stages of group work.
The specific combination of various sources may have important effects
on the ways these conflicts are managed, about the effectiveness of intervention
techniques, and about the ultimate consequences these conflicts
may have for individual well-being, team effectiveness, or organizational
survival. For example, sociocognitive conflicts may be quite functional and
promote the quality of group decision making but only when conflicts of
interest are absent. That is, when participants perceive their goals to be
cooperatively linked, they engage in constructive controversy and benefit
from sociocognitive conflict. When they perceive their goals to be competitive
linked, as in conflicts of interest, however, they do not engage in
constructive controversy, and cognitive conflict hinders rather than helps
team performance (e.g., Tjosvold, 1998). We believe herein lies an important
question for future research and theory development: “How do mixtures of
conflict sources affect conflict dynamics and ultimate outcomes?”
ConsequenCes of WorKPlaCe ConfliCt aCross levels of analysis
Conflict in organizations has multiple functions; it influences a number of
outcome-related parameters and it does so in a variety of ways. Conflict outcomes
can be seen in terms of the utility gained or lost by participants alone
and together. Utility can be narrowly defined in economic, monetary terms
or broadly defined in terms of both material (money) and nonmaterial (love,
respect) value. Traditionally, conflict research has focused on material outcomes
in terms of individual and collective gains and losses. For example,
much of the work on interpersonal and small-group negotiation concentrates
on predicting the joint gain parties realize in so-called integrative, win–win
agreements that reconcile seemingly opposed aspirations (Bazerman et al.,
2000; Carnevale & Pruitt, 1992; De Dreu et al., 2007).
The quality of agreement following dispute resolution has a variety
of important influences on subsequent interaction processes and performance-related
issues. For example, the party who gains the upper hand in
the conflict sees its power-base strengthened and thus can operate more
effectively in future endeavours. Integrative, win–win solutions create
order and stability, foster social harmony, increase feelings of self-efficacy,
reduce the probability of future conflict, and stimulate economic prosperity.
Poor agreements, or failures to agree, leave parties dissatisfied, create
frustration and annoyance, disrupt social order, drive new conflict, and
fuel disharmony (De Dreu, Beersma, Stroebe, & Euwema, 2006; Rubin,
Pruitt, & Kim, 1994).
Apart from these indirect effects, conflict can have more direct effects
that are not necessarily mediated by the quality of the negotiated agreement.
Alternative functions of workplace conflict can include health,