Search results

Do accommodative or integrative components make contentious conflict behavior more effective? A questionnaire study shows that Japanese subordinates (N = 136) handle interpersonal conflicts with superiors more effectively to the extent that they complement high contending with high accommodating. By contrast, prior research shows that high contending by Dutch subordinates and superiors is more effective if complemented with high integrating. Together, these findings support the notion that the most effective conglomeration of contending with other components of conflict behavior is society‐specific.

This paper reviews the empirical research dealing with two types of intragroup interdependence at both the group and individual levels of analysis. Based on this review we identify directions for further research, including attention to levels‐of‐analysis issues, the effects of interdependence over time, and the development of prescriptive theory. The paper ends with the description of a theory‐based intervention framework, intended as a tool for choosing the appropriate intervention in work teams and for stimulating the development of such a prescriptive theory.

Resilience is the ability to recover and once again adapt former behaviours that have characterized an individual, prior to the period of disruption. It requires various qualities, resources and power to recover immediately after a traumatic event and is found related to a number of variables and concepts. The purpose of the study is to examine the relationship of long-term orientation and risk propensity on resilience using structural equation modelling (SEM).

R Program was used to perform SEM on the data collected online from 357 samples using three standardized questionnaires to measure long-term orientation, risk propensity and resilience.

It was found that long-term orientation and its factors, respect for tradition and planning, were having a positive relationship with resilience. No relationship was found between risk propensity and resilience.

A fair review of literature has found that no previous studies have examined the relationship between long-term orientation and risk propensity on resilience. The present study is a modest effort towards this direction. The findings are indeed significant and contribute substantially to literature.

We offer a new perspective on group affective diversity by introducing the construct of mixed group mood, denoting co-occurring positive and negative mood states between different members of a group. Mixed group mood is characterized by four facets, namely members’ distribution between two positive and negative subgroups, subgroups’ average mood intensity, subgroups’ mood intensity heterogeneity, and individual members’ mood ambivalence. Building on information/decision-making and social categorization/similarity–attraction perspectives, we explore the performance consequences of mixed group mood along these four facets and we discuss implications and directions for future research.

This study aims to look at the interaction dynamics among engineering professionals from the lens of status hierarchies and derive on the role of intragroup conflicts prevalent in engineering teams. It develops and tests a comprehensive moderated-mediation model combining interpersonal status dynamics (of talent and conflicts prevalent within the team) with team external power dynamics (with other teams) and their resultant effect on team performance through the intragroup conflicts.

Data at team level from 1,265 members belonging to 218 engineering teams were used for hypothesis testing.

Process and status conflicts fully explain the negative effect of having more talented members in teams on team performance. High talented teams have lower levels of process and status conflicts and higher levels of performance when they have high power.

This paper contributes to the literature on engineering teams, team status, power and conflicts.

This paper advises manager on where to exactly look for problems in the internal working of talented teams and conditions that could negatively impact their performance.

Research on teams’ internal composition and team performance link remains inconclusive. The established pattern of thinking in both practice and research is that having more talented members in the engineering teams is attached to superior performance. Whereas it is often the case that even after having multiple talented members, teams are not able to perform well. With some exceptions, studies have not paid attention to the dynamics of having more talented members and its flip side on team performance.