In the years since the last major review of conflict, the primary thrust in the research on conflict in organizations has shifted the emphasis away from dyadic conflict and toward the study of intragroup conflict. Influenced by Jehn's work, this body of research has largely focused on distinguishing between conflict types; most notably task versus relationship conflict. However, this research has focused on within-level relationships, thus neglecting the multilevel nature of intragroup conflict and its emergence processes. After reviewing the antecedents of conflict across levels, the authors examine the constructs and processes common to the intraindividual, dyadic, and group levels as well as those that are unique to each level and the cross-level influences of those constructs. The authors conclude by proposing a multilevel model of group conflict that integrates the individual, dyadic, and intragroup levels of analysis.

The definition of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has evolved from one in which the behavior is unrewarded to one in which rewards play a significant role. As a result, little is known about mechanisms that sustain unrewarded OCB. We used the theory of other orientation to examine 2 mechanisms based on the norm of reciprocity: the obligation to reciprocate the benefits already received from another ("paying you back") and the expected reciprocity that one's actions will stimulate future benefits from another ("paying me forward"). We propose that these mechanisms are more or less influential depending on one's motivational orientation. In 3 experiments using both trait and state indicators of other orientation, we found that the prosocial behavior of individuals higher in other orientation was more strongly influenced by the obligation to reciprocate and less affected by the expectation of reciprocity.

No abstract

The shared mood or affect of a work group can exert a powerful influence on the group’s social dynamics and effectiveness. However, the mood of others can be difficult to read, leading to divergent perceptions of group affect among members. What happens when individuals perceive the group’s affect differently? We answer this question by investigating how divergence in perceptions of group affect influences individuals’ social integration and the group’s performance. In doing so, we examine the implications of divergence in perceived group affect for individuals and the group as a whole. In a field study of 1,419 individuals in 107 work groups, we found that divergence in perceptions of the group’s positive affect was negatively associated with individuals’ commitment to the team and undermined the positive impact of group affect on group performance. We discuss the implications of our findings for refining theory on group affect, the value of strongly shared affect, and how leaders can foster a stronger sense of shared affect within groups.

Recent political events across the world suggest a retrenchment from globalization and a possible increase in parochialism. This inward-looking threat from parochialism occurs just as the global community faces growing challenges that require trans-national cooperation. In this research, we question if strong identification with an in-group necessarily leads to parochialism and ultimately is detrimental to global cooperation. Building on research on global social identification, we explore whether strong local identification can expand in inclusiveness to global identification, and among whom this is likely to happen. The results of our global public goods study – conducted in South Korea and the United States – show that high levels of social identification with a local group can extend to the global collective, particularly for individuals who are also high in concern-for-others. Furthermore, this identification translates into behavior that benefits the global, anonymous group at a cost to oneself. These results shed light on how to avoid the trap of parochialism and instead engender cooperative behavior with the broader global community.