The Intemational Journal of Conflict Management 2005, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp.

55-69

THE ROLE OF EMOTIONS IN CONFLICT MANAGEMENT: THE CASE OF WORK TEAMS

Helena Syna Desivilya
Emek Yezreel College, Israel

Dana Yagil
University of Haifa, Israel The current study aims to identify the factors underlying differing preferences for conflict-management patterns within work teams. Two major antecedents of dispute resolution modes were examined: the team members' emotional reactions to and their perceptions ofthe type of conflicts encountered in their work group. The sample consisted of 69 medical teams, comprising 331 employees (nurses and physicians) employed in several medical organizations. Self-report structured questionnaires were used to assess the research variables. A series of regression analyses showed that cooperative (integrating and compromising) patterns of conflict management were associated with positive intragroup emotional states; contentious (dominating) patterns were associated with positive as well as negative emotions; and an avoidance pattern was associated with negative emotions only. Additionally, negative emotions were found to mediate the association of relationship conflict with a dominating pattern of conflict management. The flndings point to the centrality of emotional states in determining conflict management preferences at the intragroup level Keywords: Organizational cotiflict, Intragroup processes. Emotions With the growing popularity of work teams as a means to improve quality, increase efficiency and ensure organizational sustainability, effective intragroup conflict management is regarded as a vital asset (Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000; DeDreu & Weingart, 2003; Pfeffer & Veiga, 1999). Notwithstanding a recent revival of research on group dynamics generally and conflict in work groups and Note: Correspondence conceming this article should be addressed to Helena Syna Desivilya, Emek Yezreel College, Emek Yezreel 19300, Israel, Phone/Fax: 972-46423041/6423422. (desiv@yvc.ac.il)

56

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

teams specifically (Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000; Ayoko, Hartel, & CuUen, 2002; Jehn, Nortcraft, & Neale, 1999; Simons & Peterson, 2000; Van de Vliert & Janssen, 2001), little attention has been paid to factors guiding the choice of dispute resolution modes. In light of the importance of effective intra-team conflict management to organizational survival, the current study was designed to address this gap. The study aimed to identify the factors underlying different preferences for conflict-management patterns within work teams. Among the potential antecedents of intra-team strategic choice, we focused on the role of the team members' emotions and their perceptions of the nature of the conflicts experienced in their work group. Extant research on conflict resolution tends to view coping modes as products of a purely rational choice, thereby discounting the impact of the disputants' emotional state (Brodtker & Jameson, 2001; Jones, 2000; Kolb & Bartunek, 1992; Putnam, 2001). Moreover, research on the role of emotions in work groups and teams is sparse (Barsade, 2002; Kelley & Barsade, 2001). The present research therefore, aimed to fill these conceptual gaps, by demonstrating the significant role of team members' emotional state in their choice of conflict-management patterns. Furthermore, the study explored the assumption that group members' perceptions of the nature of conflicts encountered in the work unit (task conflicts, relationship conflicts) significantly affect their emotional reactions toward teammates. Conflict Managennent Patterns in Work Teams Most studies on interpersonal conflict-management patterns have adopted the Dual Concem Model as a theoretical framework (Blake & Mouton, 1964; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986; Rahim, 1983). The basic tenet of this model postulates that the conflict-management mode adopted by an individual stems from two underlying motives: concem for self and concem for the other party. The strength of each of these two motivational orientations according to Blake and Mouton (1964), Pruitt and Rubin (1986) and Rahim (1983), may vary as a function of the particular conflict situation, with differing emphases yielding five major conflict-management patterns: (1) Dominating (high concem for self and low concem for the other); (2) Obliging (low concem for self and high concem for the other); (3) Avoiding (low concem for self and low concem for the other); (4) Integrating (high concem for self and high concem for the other); and (5) Compromising (moderate concem for self and moderate concem for the other, in Rahim's 1983 version of the model). The present study adapted this underlying typology of conflict-management patterns to research on work teams. Most of the extant research on interpersonal conflict management has dealt with active and open attenipts by disputants to deal with their differences. Yet, some research findings, notably those emerging from qualitative studies, have indicated that members of work groups often resort to passive approaches in conflict management. For example, Ayoko et al. (2002) showed a 75% avoidance rate in the reactions of members of work groups to communication breakdowns. In a similar vein, Kolb and Bartunek (1992) and Roloff and Ifert (2000) found that
The International Journal of Conflict Management,Yo]. 16, No. 1,2005

H. S. DESrVILYA AND D. YAGIL

57

avoiding disputes, i.e., refraining from direct confrontation with conflict issues in formal or public sphere, was a prevailing mode of conflict management in organizations, especially by low-status individuals and members of minorities. Notwithstanding this apparent pervasiveness of a passive approach to work team conflict, its underlying features, antecedents and outcomes have seldom been investigated (Roloff & Ifert, 2000; Tjosvold & Sun, 2002). Rusbult's (1993) research on dissatisfaction and crisis in close relationships showed that a passive conflict-management pattem may have two different meanings: it may imply loyalty to the oAer, i.e., a constructive intention of repairing the relationship, and hence the use of an obliging mode; or it may convey a destmctive attitude of contempt and disregard for the other thus leading to the choice of an avoiding mode. The present study explored both these representations of the passive approach (obliging and avoiding) as well as the three pattems associated with an active approach (integrating, compromising and dominating) in a work team context. Role of Emotion in Conflict-Management Strategies in Work Teams In line with the premise that strategic choice may be affected by particular circumstances faced by disputants (Blake & Mouton, 1964; Pmitt & Rubin, 1986; Rahim, 1983), the present study shows that the emotional state of team members constitutes an important determinant of their conflict-management preference. Three underlying components of emotional state have been proposed: behavioral, physiological and cognitive (Brodtker & Jameson, 2001; Jones, 2000). The behavioral element refers to the way individuals express their emotional reactions. The physiological dimension pertains to the bodily experience of emotion. The cognitive component entails the perception and appraisal of the particular situation that has prompted the emotional state. It is this element that is most relevant to the present topic. According to appraisal theories of emotion (e.g., Lazams, 1991), negative feelings stem from a perceived obstruction of one's expectations and goals, while positive feelings result from a perception of attaining one's goals or receiving unexpected gains. More specifrcally, Jones (2000) and Brodtker and Jameson (2001) view the role of emotion in situations of conflict as fundamental. Unlike previous research, which has treated emotions as a discrete variable, Brodtker and Jameson contend "that conflict is an emotionally defrned and driven process, and that recognizing this fact fundamentally alters one's approach to conflict management" (p. 263). In a similar vein, Thompson, Nadler, and Kim (1999), argue that emotions constitute an integral element of human relations, and hence of negotiations and conflict management. Based on these premises, the present research posited the emotional reactions with both positive and negative valence of members of work teams as major predictors of their overall orientation to conflict management within their work unit. Following Lazarus' (1991) defmition, positive and negative emotions were viewed as separate elements rather than as opposite poles of the same dimension. Consequently, each might have different antecedents as well as different effects on conflict-management pattems. Research on conflict has emphasized the role of emotions in the dispute-management process. Specifically, several empirical studies have investigated the
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1 2005

58

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

effect of emotions on negotiations. Druckman and Broome (1991) showed that liking and familiarity were related to negotiators' flexibility and strategic choice in pre-negotiation. Similarly, Camevale and Isen (1986), Baron et al. (1990) and Forgas (1998) found that a positive mood led to more cooperative and less con^etitive behavior in negotiation than either a neutral or a negative mood. Rhoades, Arnold, and Clifford (2001) showed that self-reported positive affect associated with work disputes elicited problem-solving tendencies. Barsade's (2002) study, conducted in a group context, showed that positive emotional contagion improved cooperation among group members. Other studies focusing on the effects of specific emotions demonstrated the negative impact of anger on individuals' attitudes towards an opponent, on their actual behavior in the course of conflict, and on negotiation outcomes (Alh-ed, 2000; Allred, Mallozzi, Matsui, & Raia, 1997; Baron, 1993). Conceivably, positive emotional experiences in the work team would facilitate the open discussion of differences, which was found to facilitate constructive conflict management (Ayoko et al., 2002; Hobman et al., 2003; Kay, Shapiro, & Weingart, 2001; Pruitt & Syna, 1989). This can be acconq)lished either by passively obliging teammates or by actively attempting to cooperate with them. Conversely, adverse emotional experiences would hinder open communication about disparities and disagreements, which in tum would mitigate problem solving, motivating the use of either confrontational, active, contentious patterns or nonconfrontational modes, such as avoidance (Allred et al., 1997; Ayoko et al., 2002; Canary, Cupach, & Messman, 1995). Based on the above reasoning and on extant research, the following two hypotheses were posited: Hypothesis 1: A team member's positive emotions toward teammates will be positively related to a preference for conflict-management patterns that are integrating, conq)romising, and obliging. Hypothesis 2: A team member's negative emotions toward teammates will be positively associated with a preference for conflict-management patterns that are dominating and avoiding pattems. Relationships of Type of conflict with Team Members' Emotional Reactions Davidson and Greenhalgh (1999) suggested that emotion state in the context of conflict management derives from the way a particular dispute is perceived. Akin to this assumption, Kelley and Barsade (2001) contended that intragroup emotional responses emanate to a large extent from the overall interpersonal atmosphere within the group. Presumably, the nature of conflicts, as viewed by team members, constitutes a relevant aspect of the work team's emotional climate, thereby indirectly affecting their conflict-management patterns. Interactions among members of work teams reflect both social as well as mission-related aspects. Consequently, intragroup disputes comprise both relationship and task conflicts (Amason & Schweiger, 1997; DeDreu & Weingart, 2003; Jehn, 1997). According to Jehn (1992; 1994), relationship conflicts involves personal and affective elements, including tension, dislike, disagreements about values, personal taste and interpersonal styles. Task conflicts entail disparities in opinions
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1,2005

H. S. DESrVILYA AND D. YAGIL

59

about distribution of resources, procedures and other task-related issues. Conceivably, work groups tend to face both types of conflicts in tandem. Nevertheless, some researchers have emphasized the importance of distinguishing between relationship and task conflict due to their differential consequences on group outcomes (e.g., Amason & Schweiger, 1997; Jehn, 1997). Although a recent nieta-analytical study (DeDreu & Weingart, 2003) has cast some doubt on the functional aspects of task conflict in terms of group performance, it did not totally preclude the benevolent effects of task conflict, but rather suggested that such effects might be restricted to specific conditions and situations. Any type of conflict engenders some degree of stress, frustration and tension, thereby creating unpleasant feelings or disrupting a positive emotional atmosphere. Indeed, DeDreu and Weingart (2003) clearly demonstrated that both relationship conflict and task conflict were adversely associated with satisfaction. Nevertheless, task conflict appeared less harmful than its relationship counterpart in terms of group members' overall contentment. The present study assumed therefore, that relationship conflict will have a stronger adverse effect on work team members' emotional state than task conflict. Specifically, perceived pervasiveness of relationship-type conflicts will markedly enhance the negative feelings of individuals toward other employees in their work team. A group member's perception of frequent task conflicts within the work group will also create unpleasant feelings toward teammates, but not nearly as intense as in the case of relationship conflicts. Following this line of reasoning, a third hypothesis was posited thus: Hypothesis 3. Both task conflict and relationship conflict will be positively associated with negative emotions of work group members toward teammates. However, the association of relationship conflict with negative emotions will be stronger than that of task conflict. In summary, the team members' emotional state is thought to play a central role in their preferences for conflict-management pattems. At the same time, prevalence of two conflict typestask and relationshipis expected to affect the team members' emotional state. Method Sample A total of 69 medical teams, comprising 331 employees (nurses and physicians) participated in the study. Of the respondents, 81.9% were women, mean age was 40.33 (SD = 10.22), mean years of education 16.18 (SD = 2.65), and mean years of tenure in current work group 9.38 (S> = 7.84). All the respondents were employed in public sector medical organizations^both inpatient medical centers and outpatient clinicsin northem Israel. The average team size was 15.22 (SD = 11.51).

The International Journal of Conflict Management. Vol. 16, No. 1 2005

60

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

Measures Three measures were filled out by the respondents with regard to their work group: Conflict-Management Styles. The subjects' conflict-management pattems were assessed with Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory (ROCI-II) (Rahim, 1983).' Respondents were asked to rate 28 items, representing five pattems of conflict management, on 5-point Likert-type scales (5 = strongly agree to 1 = strongly disagree) with regard to the strategies they use to cope with conflicts with members of their work group. The internal consistency reliabilities of the five scales integration, obliging, avoiding, compromising and dominatingwere satisfactory, ranging from .69 to .80. Positive and Negative Emotions. These were measured by the PANAS scale developed by Watson, Clark, and Tellegen, (1988). The inventory consists of 9 positive emotions (e.g., "active," "alert," "excited") and 10 negative emotions (e.g., "distressed," "hostile," "ashamed"). Respondents were asked to rate each emotion on a 5-point Likert-type scale (5 = strongly agree to 1 = strongly disagree), with regard to their feelings toward members of their group. This generalized measurement of emotions was based on the assertion of Watson et al. (1988) that the PANAS can be used to examine emotions at varying degrees of generality (ranging from "right now" to "in general"). The intemal consistency of the scales was .77 and .87 for the positive and negative scale, respectively. Conflict Types. These were measured by the refined version (Pearson, Ensley, & Amason, 2002) of the Intragroup Conflict Scale (ICS) developed by Jehn (1992; 1994). The instmment comprises two dimensions: relationship (affective) conflict, measured by 3 items (anger, personal friction, and tension), and task (cognitive) conflict, also measured by 3 items (disagreements about ideas, differences of opinion, and the need to settle disagreements). Respondents rated the frequency of each type of conflict in his/her respective work team. The instrument was translated into Hebrew using the back translation method. The Cronbach a intemal consistency of the scales was .84 and .74, for relationship conflict and task conflict, respectively. Procedure Registered nurses who were enrolled in a college program to complete their undergraduate degree were requested to administer the questionnaires in the 69 work teams participating in the research. The questionnaires were administered individually in each workplace. An explanation was given to each participant that the study examines relationships within work teams, and all were assured of the secrecy of their responses.

'The instrument was used with permission from the Center for Advanced Studies in Management. Copyright 2005 by the Center for Advanced Studies in Management. All rights reserved.
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol 16, No. 1,2005

U.S. DESIVILYA AND D. YAGIL

61

Results The first set of analyses included Pearson correlations followed by multiple regressions to test the research hypotheses. Status (i.e., physician or nurse) was entered as a control variable. The mediating processes were then tested, using the multiple regression procedure suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986). Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations and intercorrelations matrix between conflict management stategies, emotions and conflict type. Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations Among the Research Variables
M 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Integrating Dominating Avoiding Compromising Obliging Positive emotions 7. Negative emotions 8. Relationship conflict 9. Task conflict SD .51 .84 .67 .65 .59 .53 .63 .51 .39 1 2 3 4 5

3.97 2.64 3.23 3.69 3.32 3.86 1.90 2.89 2.91

-.01 .10 -.02 .63** .03 .19** .04 .48** .09

.12* .43** .24**

.00

.36** .06

-.22** .21** .18** -.17** .08 -.29** -.01 -.04 .14** .02 .13* -.09 -.00 -.00
.00 .03

.03 -.02

.28 .27 .66**

*P <.05.**p<.0\. Table 2 shows the regressions of conflict management stategies on emotions and conflict type. As seen in the table, integrating and compromising conflict management patterns were positively related to positive emotions thereby confirming Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 was also supported, namely, both dominating and avoiding patterns were positively related to negative emotions, as hypothesized. Additionally, the dominating pattern was found to be positively related to positive emotions. Table 3 presents the regressions of positive and negative emotions on relationship conflict and task conflict. Hypothesis 3 was partially supported: as expected, relationship conflict was positively associated with negative emotions. However, task conflict was not significantly related to negative emotions. As can be seen in tables 2 and 3, task conflict is directly related to both dominating and avoiding patterns (Table 2), while relationship conflict is associated with negative emotions (Table 3). This led to an examination of the possibility that negative emotions mediate the effect of relationship conflict on conflict-management strategies. Mediation testing followed Baron and Kenny's
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1 2005

62

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

(1986) guidelines: (1) each conflict-management strategy was regressed on relationship conflict; (2) each conflict-management strategy was regressed on negative emotions and relationship conflict; and (3) negative emotionsthe expected mediatorwas regressed on relationship conflict. Table 4 shows the results of the three regressions. As can be seen, relationship conflict is mediated by negative emotions in its effect on dominating pattern. The same procedure was applied for relationship conflict, negative emotions and integrating, avoiding, compromising and obliging conflict-management patterns, but no direct effect of conflict type on either of these patterns was obtained, thus precluding inference of mediation. Table 2 Regression of Conflict Management Patterns on Emotions and Conflict Types
Integrating Dominating Avoiding Compromising Obliging

Positive emotions .44 Negative emotions -.07 Relationship conflict -.02 Task conflict .04 Status -.09 R' F

.46** .21 .13* .10 .08 .40 -.08 .25 .19* .24 .22**-.08 -.03 -.01 -.01 .04 .05 .00 .06 .23 .19**-.15 -.17* .02 -.05 .12 .04 .02 .01 -.12

.33** .11 -.08 .11 .00 -.03 .02 .03 -.06 -.06

.10 .11 -.04 .03 -.03

.25
26.51**

.08
6.79**

.06
5.29**

.14
10.20**

.02
1.09

Note: Status: 1 = physician, 0 = nurse *p<.05. **p<.01.

Table 3 Regression of Positive and Negative Emotions Toward Group Members on Conflict Type Positive emotions b P
Relationship conflict Task conflict /?-

Negative emotions

b
.32 .01

p
.25** .00 .07 11.83**

.06 -.13 00 79

.06 -.10

F *p<.05.**p<.0\.

The International Journal of Conflict Management,Vo\. 16, No. 1,2005

H. S. DESIVILYA AND D. YAGIL

63

Discussion The present research was aimed at identifying factors guiding the choice by members of work teams of strategies for dealing with intragroup disputes, focusing on the role of emotions and of the perceived nature of conflicts in their preferences for conflict-management pattems. The study examined five categories of dispute management modes: integrating, compromising, dominating, obliging and avoiding, thus comparing cooperative versus contentious, and active versus passive approaches. Table 4 Mediation Tests: Emotions Mediating the Effect of Conflict Type on Conflict Management Patterns
Integrating Dominating Avoiding Compromising Obliging

Stepl Relationship conflict Step 2 Relationship conflict Negative emotions R' Relationship conflict Negative emotions

-.01

-.01 .00

.24

.14* .02**

.03

.02 .00

.01 .00

.02

.01

.01 .00

.05 -.19

.05 -.23* .05**

.17

.10

-.04 -.03 .20

.06

-.01

.00 .00

.00 .00 .00

.24 .18* .05**

.19* -.19** .08 .03 .04**

b .32
.07*

P
.26**

*p<.05.**p<.0\.
The authors predicted that team members' choice of a conflict-management pattem will be related to feelings about their teammates, which in turn will be associated with conflict type. In line with these expectations, the results show that conflict management pattems are indeed linked to emotional reactions toward group members. These fmdings seem to corroborate the contention by Jones (2000), Brodtker and Jameson (2001), and Thompson et al. (1999) about the importance of emotions in the conflict-management process. The current study demonstrates the explicit contribution of emotions in the work-team context, lending further support to Barsade's (2002) and Kelley and Barsade (2001) research on the relationship between emotional climate and intemal group dynamics.
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1 2005

64

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

The present fmdings indicate that the choice of cooperative mode (integrating and conpromising) was positively associated with a positive emotional experience. Conversely, the choice of a contentious pattem was negatively associated with an adverse intragroup emotional experience. Both these links lend additional support to previous findings in the domain of intragroup and interpersonal conflict resolution (e.g., Alked, 2000; Baron et al., 1990; Barsade, 2002; Canary, Cupach, & Messman, 1995; Camevale & Isen, 1986; Forgas, 1998). Unexpectedly, the contentious conflict-management preference was also positively related to positive emotions, although the relationship of positive emotions with a cooperative pattem was much stronger. A possible explanation for this finding may stem from the range of nuances contained in the dimension of positive emotions. Presumably, emotions such as "alert," "excited," or "attentive" (contained in the PANAS positive dimension) reflect not just positive mood or affect but also vigilance. Thus, both types of active pattems, i.e., dominating and integrating, were positively related to the "positive" category of emotions comprising die vigilance component. By contrast, the passive pattem of avoiding was related to negative emotions only. This calls for fiiture in-depth research on the associations of different categories of emotions, including purely positive affective states as well as trait-related affect, with choice of strategy (Rhoades et al., 2001). The fmdings lend support to our premise based on Davidson and Greenhalgh's (1999) argument, that the way conflict issues are perceived determines the individual's emotional reactions. Specifically, the prevalence of interpersonal tensions markedly contributes to adverse emotional responses which in tum foster preferences for contentious modes of dealing with intragroup conflicts. The study thus points to a differentiated pattem underlying the choice of contentious in contrast with cooperative modes as demonstrated by the mediation tests. The tests show that negative emotions mediate the association of relationship conflict with the dominating pattem of conflict management, suggesting that type of conflict has a more significant, albeit indirect, effect on the choice of conqjetitive conflict management modes than on cooperative modes. The results also suggest that the preference for confirontational approaches to dispute resolution in comparison to nonconfrontational orientations are related to different factors. Emotional experience is shown to be the sole direct link to the integrating and conqjromising pattems. By contrast, the pattems of dominating and avoiding are directly related both to emotions and to type of conflict. Furthermore, the negative relationship between the avoiding mode and task conflict seems to support the notion that task conflicts might have a degree of positive value in work groups (Amason & Schweiger, 1997; Jehn, 1997; Jehn et al., 1999) or it may at least reflect the task conflict's functional aspect in enhancing the involvement of team members in group missions (Ayoko et al., 2002; Hobman et al., 2003). More research is necessary to illuminate the relationships between the passive and active approaches to conflict management, and the nature of conflict in work teams, including task and relatiotiship conflicts. The research findings partly corroborated the authors' prediction regarding the associations between type of conflict and emotional reactions. As expected, relationship conflict was positively related to negative emotions. Further investigation
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1,2005

H. S. DESIVILYA AND D. YAGIL

65

of the relationship between conflict type and emotions will be necessary to ascertain the potentially distinct effects of different conflict issues on emotional climate in work teams. Limitations of the Study The current study reflects several limitations. The fu:st relates to a potential methodological flaw: the process of team selection may have hampered the representativeness of our sample. As indicated in the method section, one member of each team was a college student who then recruited other members of his/her team for the sample. Conceivably, the recruiters selected individuals with whom they had positive or close relationships, thus biasing the sample toward homogeneity. Future studies should seek a more systematic recruitment process, to assure the representativeness of the research sample. Second, the measures used required respondents to report general processes in their work group, and their emotions in general toward group members. These variables are likely to indicate a certain level of stability over time, rather than reveal fluctuations. Future research should measure the relationships between the variables on a more specific level (e.g., the association of positive/negative emotions regarding a specific event with the choice of a particular conflict management strategy). Direction for Future Research The present research points to further study in several directions. The research examined the relationship between the feelings of the individual toward other members of a work team and his/her preferences for conflict-management pattems. Presumably, emotions within the group and conflict-management modes are likely to assume a cyclical pattem: the individual's conflict-management approach might affect the other members' emotional response toward him/her. It would be important therefore to explore the recurrent dynamics of the relationships between these variables, preferably employing longitudinal research designs. Further research is also called for to examine the mediating role of emotions in the relationship between conflict-management pattems and variables associated with interpersonal ties among group members (e.g., interpersonal tmst) as well as structural characteristics of the group (e.g., demographic diversity). Additionally, as recommended by DeDreu and Weingart (2003) research should continue inspecting the links between different conflict issues (e.g., affective/identity-related or cognitive/task-related issues) and strategic choice, probing further into preferences for cooperative versus contentious and active, open versus passive nonconfrontational approaches to dispute management in work group settings. Conclusions The present study contributes to illuminating the phenomenon of conflict management in work teams by demonstrating the important role of emotions in group members' preferences for intemal dispute resolution. It thereby expanded the choice of conflict-management strategies beyond purely rational elements, which have been investigated in previous research, to include less deliberate elements.
The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1 2005

66

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

The study also indicates that the team members' perception of the nature of conflict issues they have encountered in the work group constitutes a significant antecedent of their emotional reactions, linking indirectly to their conflict management modes. This link helps closing a gap in the research literature concerning the relationships between conflict type and dispute resolution preferences. The present research also has practical ramifications: understanding how team members perceive their conflict experiences and appraise their affective states can enhance team-building efforts, including training in the constmctive management of intemal disputes. References Allred, K. (2000). Anger and retaliation in conflict: The role of attribution. In M. Deutsch & P. Coleman (eds.). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 236256). San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Allred, K., Mallozzi, J. S., Matsui, F., & Raia, C. P. (1997). The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 175-187. Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (2000). Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53, dlS-fAl. Amason, A. C , & Schweiger, D. M. (1997). The effects of conflict on strategic decision making effectiveness and organizational performance. In C. De Dreu & E. Van De Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (ffp. 101-116). London: Sage. Ayoko, 0. B., Hartel, C. E. J., & Cullen, V. J. (2002). Resolving the puzzle of productive and destructive conflict in culturally heterogeneous work groups: A communicationaccommodation theory approach. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13, 165-195. Baron, R. (1993). Affect and organizational behavior: When feeling good (or bad) matters. In J. Mumingham (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations (pp. 63-88). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Baron, R., Fortin, S. P., Frei, R. L., Hauver, L. A., & Shack, M. L. (1990). Reducing organizational conflict: The role of socially-induced positive affect. Intemational Journal of Conflict Management, 1, 132-152. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal Personality and Social Psychology, 51, \\ 73-1182. Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effects: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 644675. Blake, R. A., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid. Houston: Gulf. Brodtker, A., & Jameson, J. K. (2001). Emotion in conflict formation and its transformation: Application to organizational conflict management. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 259-275. Camevale, P. J., & Isen, A. M. (1986). The influence of positive affect and visual access on the discovery of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 113. Canary, D. J., Cupach, W. R., & Messman, S. J. (1995). Relationship conflict. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

The International Journal of Conflict Management, Wol. 16, No. 1,2005

H. S. DESIVILYA AND D. YAGIL

67

Davidson, M. N., & Greenhalgh, L. (1999). The role of emotion in negotiation: The impact of anger and race. In R. J. Bies, R. J. Lewicki, & B. H. Sheppard (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 7, pp. 3-26). Stamford, CT: JAI Press. Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16, 49-64. DeDreu, C., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88. 741-750. DeDreu, C , & Van De Vliert, E. (1997). Using conflict in organizations. London: Sage Publications. Druckman, D., & Broome, B. J. (1991). Value differences and conflict resolution: Familiarity or liking? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35, 571-593. Forgas, J. P. (1998). On feeling good and getting your way: Mood effects on negotiator cognition and bargaining strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 565577. Gully, S., Incalcaterra, K., Joshi, A., & Beaubien, J. M. (2002). A Meta-analysis of team efficiency, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87,819-832. Hobman, E., Bordia, P., & Gallois, C. (2003). Consequences of feeling dissimilar from others in a work team. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17,301-325. Jehn, K., Nortcraft, G., & Neale, M. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in work groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741-763. Jehn, K. (1997). Affective and cognitive conflict in work groups: Increasing performance through value-based intragroup conflict. In C. De Dreu & E. Van De Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (pp. 87-101). London: Sage. Jehn, K. (1994). Enhancing effectiveness: An investigation of advantages and disadvantages of value based intragroup conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 5, 223-238. Jehn, K. (1992). T/ie impact of intragroup conflict on effectiveness: A multidimensional examination of the benefits and detriments of conflict. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. Jones, T. S. (2000). Emotional communication in conflict: Essence and impact. In W. Eadie & P. Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 81-104). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kay, L., Shapiro, D., & Weingart, L. (2001). Maximizing cross-functional new product teams' innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 779-793. Kelley, J., & Barsade, S. G. (2001). Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 99-130. Kolb, D. M., & Bartunek, J. M. (Eds.) (1992). Hidden conflict in organizations: Uncovering the behind-the scenes disputes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Kozan, M. K. (1997). Culture and conflict management: A theoretical framework. International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, 338-360. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press. O'Connor, K. M., Gruenfeld, D., & McGrath, J. (1993). The experience and effects of conflict in continuing work groups. Small Group Research, 24, 362-382. The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1 2005

68

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND EMOTIONS

Pearson, A. W., Ensley, M. D., & Amason, A. C. (2002). An assessment and refinement of Jehn's intragroup conflict scale. InternationalJournal of Conflict Management, 13,110126. Pfeffer, J., & Veiga, J. F. (1999). Putting people first for organizational success. Academy of Management Executive, 13,3748. Pruitt, D. G., & Syna, H. (1989). Successful problem solving. In D. Tjosvold & D. W. Johnson (Eds.), Productive conflict management: Perspectives for organizations (pp. 6990). Minneapolis, MN: Team Media. Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate ands settlement. New York: Random House. Putnam, L. (2001). The language of opposition: Challenges in organizational dispute resolution. In W. Eadie & P. Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 1021). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rahim, M. A. (1983). A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflicts. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 368-376. Rhoades, J. A., Arnold, J., & Clifford, J. (2001). The role of affective traits and affective states in disputants' motivation and behavior during episodes of organizational conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 329-345. Roloff, M. E., c & Ifert, D. E. (2000). Conflict management through avoidance: Withholding complaints, suppressing arguments, and declaring topics taboo. In S. Petronio (Ed.), Balancing the secrets of private disclosures {^^. 151-164). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum. Rubin, J. Z., & Levinger, G. (1995). Levels of analysis: In search of generalizable knowledge. In B. B. Bunker & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Conflict, cooperation and justice (pp. 1338). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Rubin, J. Z., Pruitt, D. G., & Kim S. H. (1994). Social Conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement. New York: Me Graw-Hill. Rusbult, E. C. (1993). Understanding responses to dissatisfaction in close relationships: The exit-voice-loyalty-neglect model. In S. Worchel & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Conflict between people and groups: Causes and resolution (pp. 30-59). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Simons, T., & Peterson, R. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 102-111. Thompson, L., Nadler, J., & Kim, P. H. (1999). Some like it hot: The case for the emotional negotiator. In L. Thompson, J. Levine, & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognitions in organizations (pp. 139-161). Mahwah, N.J: Eribaum. Tjosvold, D., & Sun, H.F. (2002). Understanding conflict avoidance: Relationship, motivations, actions, and consequences. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13, 142-164. Tjosvold, D. (1998). The cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments and challenges. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47, 285-313. Van de Vliert, E., & Janssen, O. (2001). Description, explanation, and prescription of intragroup conflict behaviors. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Theory and research. Applied social research (pp. 267-297). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.

The International Journal of Conflict Management,VoX. 16, No. 1,2005

H. S. DESIVILYA AND D. YAGIL

69

Biographical Notes Helena Syna Desivilya is a senior lecturer in the departments of sociology and anthropology and behavioral sciences at the Emek Yezreel College, Israel. Her research includes conflict management processes in various contexts such as organizations, communities and the intergroup arena. She also engages in action research on public and third sector organizations, (desiv@yvc.ac.il) Dana Yagil is a senior lecturer of social and organizational psychology Chair of the Department of Human Services, the University of Haifa, Israel. She studies organizational behavior relating to the use of power, compliance with laws, and deviant behaviors, (dyagil@research.haifa.ac.il) Received: February 14, 2004 Accepted after three revisions: May 26, 2005

The International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16, No. 1 2005