Search results

Personality differences may be a major reason of conflict, as well as the perception of conflict and preference for handling that conflict. This study aims to explore the role of personality traits in determining conflict and performance. The authors also studied the moderated mediated relationship between personality and performance through conflict and conflict management styles.

A field survey was conducted with a sample of 153 employees to test the hypotheses.

As hypothesized, agreeable persons perceive less conflict and extraverts are more likely to use integrating, obliging, compromising and avoiding styles. Emotionally stable people opt for integrating style whereas neurotics opt for dominating style. Conscientiousness, openness and emotional stability have a direct effect on performance, but the interactions between conflict and conflict management styles determine the relationship between personality traits and performance.

The cross-sectional nature of data and somewhat reliable coefficients for personality measures reduce confidence in the results. Future research should use different or multiple measures of personality. Personality traits may be explored in view of the degree of each personality trait or interactions between personality traits.

People are sensitive about engaging in conflict and handling conflict differently because of their personality characteristics. The personality traits should, therefore, be understood and considered for conflict experience, conflict management and performance.

The paper adds to management research by investigating the relationship between personality traits, conflicts, conflict management styles and performance.

The aim of this paper is to explore whether national diversity in the form of national variety (differences in kind, e.g. number of nationalities) has a positive effect on group processes and performance whereas national separation (differences in attitudes and beliefs; i.e. social distance and national stereotypes) has a negative effect.

This cross-cultural comparative study examines the moderating role of national diversity in the relationship between social attitudes on conflict and performance across two samples. Participants are presented with one of the two national variety conditions (low or high national variety) who then report on social distance, national stereotype, conflict, and performance.

National separation negatively relates to performance and positively relates to conflict. However, there is less conflict and higher performance, despite national separation, when there is high national variety.

This study is limited to individual perceptions. Research could be extended to experienced conflict and effects of individual national separation on conflict and performance at the group level.

Although social distances and negative stereotypes may not be completely eliminated, the results imply that managers can modify the effects by promoting and celebrating national variety. The results show that even conflict is modified (task conflict increases while relationship and process conflict decreases) when there is national variety despite social distances and negative stereotypes.

This study contributes to workgroup research on diversity and conflict management by exploring social attitudes and opinions. Individual attitudes are the bases of group processes and this study attends to two of the social attitudes that need to be added to our understanding of group processes.

To develop a theory to explain how national diversity within a workgroup can lead to intra‐group conflict, and how this effect may be exacerbated in the presence of nationalistic attitudes.

Defines and discusses what national diversity is and why it is relevant to multinational organizations. Then constructs a multi‐level, theoretical framework to propose the conditions under which national diversity may lead to high levels of conflict. Describes and explains the role of nationalism (i.e. individuals' attitude towards their and others' nationalities) in diverse workgroups and explore the moderating effect of nationalism on the relationship between national diversity and intra‐group conflict.

Proposes that in nationally diverse workgroups the presence of workgroup members with strong nationalistic attitudes (e.g. ingroup favoritism and outgroup rejection) will exacerbate the likelihood that national diversity may lead to relationship conflict and process conflict, and that it will weaken the likelihood that national diversity leads to task conflict.

The model demonstrates the necessity of examining national diversity and the factors and conditions, such as the presence of nationalistic attitudes that may hinder the potential of a nationally diverse workgroup.