A Multilevel View of Intragroup Conflict

Abstract

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.

Performance measurement in horizontal LSP cooperation as a field of conflict: the preventive role of collaborative processes

“…Cognitive conflict, alternatively termed task conflict by [35], refers to disagreements between alliance members around task-related issues [19,37] that revolve around the question of ''how best to accomplish an organization's objectives'' [33, p. 127]. Affective conflict, alternatively termed relationship conflict by [35], in contrast, focuses on personal elements and, therefore, tends to be more emotional in nature [38].…”

“…Therefore, attention should also be put on actively countering conflict already before and during its emergence by promoting preventive instead of only reactive means [11,40]. Conflict stems from tension, manifests itself because of ''the failure of alliance partners to coordinate'' [37, p. 157], and is triggered when interaction takes place [19]. Therefore, efforts to limit the emergence of conflict via preventive measures need to focus on points of interaction.…”

“…Therefore, efforts to limit the emergence of conflict via preventive measures need to focus on points of interaction. Here, from the general conflict avoidance perspective two collaborative processes have shown to offer substantial potential [19,20]: joint action and information sharing. Joint action in PM is an extensive form of collaboration and refers to alliance members actively coordinating their PM activities [64].…”

“…Such information sharing has been found to be vital [19,20] as it facilitates transparency with regard to performance. Through ''communication […] task details, task progress, and reasoning for task decisions'' [20, p. 384] are clarified.…”

“…In this respect, we build on the collaborative processes of joint action and information sharing, which, in general, have been identified as methods for effectively preventing the manifestation of conflicts [19,20]. We show that in the context of horizontal LSP alliances collaborative activities in PM can effectively offset the conflict potentials inherent to the alliance.…”