Task conflict, relationship conflict and agreement‐seeking behavior in Chinese top management teams

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to investigate the effects task conflict has on agreement seeking behavior and interpersonal conflict. In addition, it seeks to examine the moderating role of trust on the effects of agreement seeking behavior and interpersonal conflict on the styles of handing conflict, namely, avoidance, collaboration, and third party intervention. Design/methodology/approach -Using a structured survey instrument, this paper gathered data from 252 senior executives from Mainland China and analyzed these using the regression technique to see how interpersonal trust between executives moderates the relationship between conflict and conflict response mechanisms. The study also investigates the relationship between task and relationship conflict as well as agreement-seeking behavior among Chinese executives in Mainland China. Findings -Results show that the presence of interpersonal trust among executives affects the conflict responses for the benefit of organization. The results show that task conflict in top management teams is positively related to relationship conflict and negatively related to agreement-seeking behavior. The data support the view that intra-group trust moderates the relationship between agreement-seeking behavior and collaborating responses such that high-trust groups will have greater collaboration than low-trusting teams. Results also support that intra-group trust moderates the relationship between agreement-seeking behavior and third party responses such that high-trust groups will have greater third-party responses than low-trusting teams. Research limitations/implications -Self-report measures may have some inherent social desirability bias. Despite this potential weakness, this study examines Chinese executives and therefore provides insights into top management team literature. Practical implications -This study contributes to both practicing managers as well as to strategic management literature. This study suggests that administrators need to focus on interpersonal trust while dealing with the outcomes of task and relationship conflict. Originality/value -Although the study is related to Chinese executives, the findings from the study, that task conflict has its affect on interpersonal conflict and agreement-seeking behavior, contribute to the strategic decision making literature.

On the dimensionality of intragroup conflict

“…Affective conflict could also reduce team innovation because anger and frustration impeded effective communication within the team and reduced its members' receptiveness to each other (Hülsheger et al, 2009), which hindered the innovative information sharing process. Affective conflict lets people focus on personal emotional feelings rather than task issues, which could decrease participants' creative thinking (Parayitam et al, 2010) and thus have a negative influence on team innovation.…”

Effects of cognitive diversity on relationship conflict, agreement-seeking behaviour and decision quality: a study of Chinese management teams

“…Most of the studies examining these process variables focus on US-based organisations. One reason for selecting firms in China is differences in culture between US firms and Chinese firms (Olson et al, 2007a;Parayitam and Dooley, 2007;Parayitam et al, 2010). Collectivism is more prevalent within the Chinese culture, and it is imperative to assess whether Chinese executives would welcome diversity within their teams and analyse how conflict and agreement seeking behaviours would affect the decision quality.…”

The Effects of Harmony of Family, Distributive Justice, and Role Ambiguity on Family Member Impediment: The Mediating Role of Relationship Conflict as an Example of Developing Country Turkey

“…However, in most studies, a distinction is explained between task conflict and relationship conflict (Jehn, 1995;Huang, 2010;Curseu, Boros & Oerlemans, 2012). Task conflict refers to conflict and judgmental differences about the theme or the topic of the decision (Parayitam, Olson & Bao, 2010).…”