Previous studies have paid insufficient attention to how interorganizational task conflict affects relationship quality between parties. On the basis of survey data from the construction industry, this study explores the impact of interorganizational task conflict on relationship quality and the mediating role of relational behavior. The empirical results reveal that task conflict affects relationship quality (including satisfaction, trust, and commitment) negatively. Relational behavior has three dimensions: flexibility, information exchange, and solidarity. Information exchange partially mediates the effect of task conflict on satisfaction, trust, and commitment; solidarity plays a partial mediating role in the impact of task conflict on trust and commitment; and flexibility only mediates the impact of task conflict on satisfaction partially. Relational behavior in accordance with relational norms can partially account for the impact of interorganizational task conflict on relationship quality. This paper also provides practical guidance for construction practitioners.
PurposeThe understanding of how to mitigate opportunism in construction projects is still limited and conflicting. The complexity of causalities and interdependence among antecedents of opportunism (transaction characteristics and governance mechanisms) is the major obstacle to current research. This study takes a holistic perspective to explore the different combinations of conditions that lead to high opportunism and low opportunism in project management.Design/methodology/approachThrough 2 phases of the interview and questionnaire survey, the 91 valid survey data were collected from the buyer–seller relationships in construction projects and analyzed by adopting fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis.FindingsA single transaction characteristic is rarely sufficient to explain opportunism, and combinations of different transaction characteristics and governance mechanisms (performance ambiguity, asset specificity, buyer's requirement certainty, informal control, and formal control) have different effects on opportunism. In the case of extremely unsatisfactory transaction characteristics, even the combination of formal and informal control cannot prevent high opportunism. The combination including low-formal control and high-asset specificity easily leads to high opportunism. Besides, performance ambiguity is a vital factor in mitigating high opportunism or achieving low opportunism.Originality/valuePrevious studies have always addressed the role of one or some factors independently and separately. This study is one of the first to explore the different combinations of conditions that result in high opportunism and low opportunism in project management based on transaction costs economics and agency theory.
This study examines how negotiation subjective value (SV)-relationship SV, process SV, instrumental SV, and self-SV-in a previous round affects negotiation behavior styles-integrating, compromising, obliging, avoiding, and dominating-in the next round through two studies. Study 1 asked the respondents to complete a questionnaire based on a recalled multi-round negotiation, and 169 samples were valid. In Study 2, 205 participants totally filled out the questionnaire after a simulated negotiation. Both results point out as follows: (a) relationship SV positively relates to all five negotiation styles, and its relationship with integrating, compromising, obliging, and avoiding styles is strongest among four branches of SV; (b) process SV is only positively related to integrating; (c) instrumental SV negatively relates to uncooperative styles-avoiding and dominating-and the relationship with dominating style is strongest; (d) self-SV relates to both integrating and dominating which looks like incompatible. We finally discuss the implications, limitations, and future research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.