Leaders Transformational Conflict and Emotion Management Behaviors in Culturally Diverse Workgroups

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.
htm
EDI 31,8
694
Leaders transformational, conflict, and emotion management behaviors in culturally diverse workgroups
Oluremi B. Ayoko
The University of Queensland Business School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, and
Alison M. Konrad
Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada
Abstract
Purpose Previous research has shown that diversity is related to both task and relationship conflict in groups. The purpose of this paper is to posit that leadership is an important factor for maintaining high group performance and morale under conditions of conflict. Specifically, the paper argues that leader conflict management, emotion management, and transformational behaviors determine the impact of conflict on group outcomes. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 585 people in 89 workgroups from eight public service organizations in Australia. The authors used hierarchical regression to test the hypotheses regarding group performance and morale. To test mediation and moderation, the authors followed the procedure outlined by Baron and Kenny. Finally, they used the formulas provided by Preacher, Rucker and Hayes to test for moderated mediation. Findings Results showed that diversity increased task conflict but was unrelated to relationship conflict. Both task and relationship conflict were negatively associated with group performance and morale, and effective leadership reduced these negative effects to zero. There was also a partial support for the authors theoretical model predicting that leadership moderates the indirect effect of diversity on group outcomes occurring through the mediator of conflict. Research limitations/implications A greater amount of variation in the diversity of work groups included in the sample would have been useful for overcoming problems of restriction of range, which likely reduced ability to observe an association between diversity and group outcomes. Based on the results, in order to prevent negative emotions from task and relationship conflict from damaging group performance, leaders of diverse groups can act to manage those emotions among their group members. Results from this study implicate conflict management training. While training for conflict management is beyond the scope of this research, further research should examine this issue. Originality/value The study extends research in the area of diversity, leadership and group work. In particular, it demonstrates that transformational leadership is an important factor for maintaining high group performance and morale under conditions of conflict. It also offers practical assistance to individuals entrusted with the responsibility of managing culturally diverse workgroups. Keywords Diversity, Leadership, Conflict, Emotions, Performance management, Australia Paper type Research paper
Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal Vol. 31 No. 8, 2012 pp. 694-724 r Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2040-7149 DOI 10.1108/02610151211277581
The issue of managing diversity is still a challenge for organizations in the twenty-first century ( Jackson and Joshi, 2010). Van Knippenberg and Schippers (2007) define
Alison M. Konrad expresses her gratitude for the support of the Corus Entertainment Chair in Women in Management from the Richard Ivey School of Business.
diversity as a characteristic of social grouping that reflects the degree to which objective or subjective differences exist between group members. Although research in workplace diversity has quadrupled in the last few decades, yet, most of the outcomes demonstrate that diversity has paradoxical effects on team processes and outcomes (Joshi et al., 2011; Jackson et al., 2003; Milliken and Martins, 1996; Williams and OReilly, 1998). For example, diversity in teams is linked with negative outcomes (e.g. poor communication; Mohammed and Angell, 2004) and with positive outcomes (e.g. creativity; Lovelace et al., 2001) or even neutral effects (see Cunningham and Sagas, 2004). Recent work is identifying the conditions such as employee involvement that must be in place for diversity to generate organizational benefits (e.g. Yang and Konrad, 2011). In particular, one of the negative outcomes of diversity is conflict (Jehn et al., 1999; Pelled, 1996; Olson et al., 2007). Workgroup diversity is associated with conflict in teams, both task conflict and relationship conflict (Ayoko et al., 2002; Chatman and Flynn, 2001; Jehn et al., 1997; Jehn et al., 1999; Pelled, 1996; Pelled et al., 2001). The conflict resulting from workgroup diversity has the potential to benefit performance if it generates the elaboration of more possibilities and perspectives in problem-solving discussions (van Knippenberg et al., 2004). Workgroup conflicts often do not result in positive outcomes, however, as demonstrated by meta-analytic research linking both task and relationship conflict to poorer performance (De Dreu and Weingart, 2003). Additionally, new evidence emerging from another meta-analytical study (de Wit et al., 2011) suggests that while relationship and process conflict are negatively linked with performance, the effect of task conflict on outcomes is even more complex indicating that task conflict is only associated with positive outcomes when the link between task and relationship conflict is weak. The implication of these meta-analytic findings is that for conflict to result in positive outcomes, it must be managed effectively (Jehn, 1995; Jehn and Mannix, 2001). Hence, the link between conflict and performance in teams is not simple and linear, but moderated by contextual factors. Overall suggest that the paradoxical relationship between diversity and processes (e.g. conflict) and outcomes may be related to the inability to assess all important dimensions of context. In the present research, we agree with Jackson and colleagues (2003, see also DiTomaso and Hooijberg, 1996; Martins et al., 2003) to argue that one of the underresearched contextual factors of potential importance for affecting the relationship between conflict among diverse teams and outcomes is leadership. Specifically, to date, few empirical studies have been conducted to investigate the connection between leadership behaviors and processes at the team level (see Ayoko and Callan, 2010; Ayoko et al., 2008; Kotlyar and Karakowsky, 2007; Walumbwa et al., 2011). According to Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002), the success of organizational team performance depends partly on effective team and leadership processes. They further argue that an important research goal in organization science should be to understand how leadership and team processes connect to enhance collective success in organizations. In spite of the fact that literature is replete with theoretical and empirical work in the area of leadership (e.g. Avolio and Yammarino 2002) and team processes (e.g. see Jehn, 1995, 1997), Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002) contend that we still know relatively little about how leaders create and direct team processes to achieve collective success (p. 5, see also, Kozlowski et al., 1996). In particular, we know little about how to best lead teams that are socially and demographically diverse. Team leaders tend to have greater authority than other team members (Edmonson, 2003), while effective leaders are expected to have more knowledge, skills, and abilities in the area of people management (Bell and Kozlowski, 2002). For these reasons, team
Leaders management behaviors 695
EDI 31,8
696
members are likely to look to the leader to guide the group successfully when they become muddled in potentially destructive conflicts. Nevertheless, very little is known regarding the impact of leaders on the outcomes of conflicts in diverse teams (Zaccaro et al., 2001). Pelled et al. (2001) found that supervisor facilitation mitigated the relationship between tenure dissimilarity and conflict in a Mexican workplace, although in that sample, tenure similarity rather than dissimilarity was associated with greater conflict. Gibson and Vermeulen (2003) also found that leader performance management behaviors enhanced learning in diverse teams, which suggests that leadership is important for generating positive outcomes, such as learning from task conflicts in teams. Ayoko et al. (2012) argued that leadership behaviors focussed on antecedents to the expression of emotion limit the likelihood that cognitive or task conflict escalates to become affective conflict in virtual teams. Similarly, Ayoko et al. (2008) demonstrated that an emotional intelligence climate (e.g. conflict management norms) moderated the link between task conflict and destructive reactions to conflict while leaders with higher levels of inspiration and communication of vision were linked with minimum levels of bullying by team members (Ayoko and Callan, 2010). Given these prior findings, the leaders actions during team conflict events are likely to be critical to effective performance because of the potential for conflict to generate negative emotions and damage relationships among interdependent team members. Leaders must manage team members emotions during conflicts in order to avoid the development of a negative group emotional history, because heated exchanges and emotional outbursts have the potential to ignite a negative self-reinforcing cycle of interpersonal attacks and blaming (Kelly and Barsade, 2001). If events generating negative emotions are repeated over time, they have the potential to damage important work attitudes driving decisions to work productively, to behave cooperatively, and to remain with the organization (Ashkanasy et al., 2002). Despite the publication of a special issue of Leadership Quarterly on diversity leadership in the mid-1990s (Chen et al., 1996), relatively little research to date has examined the impact of leaders on the effectiveness of diverse teams (Nishii and Mayer, 2009; Ospina and Foldy, 2009). The few studies that have been done have validated the effectiveness of transformational leadership (Ayoko and Callan, 2010; Ayoko et al., 2008; Kearney and Gebert, 2009) and a high level of leader-member exchange shared across the entire workgroup (Nishii and Mayer, 2009; Stewart and Johnson, 2009). In particular, few studies have investigated the potential for leadership to moderate the outcomes of conflict in diverse teams, however. We propose that leaders who engage in conflict management, emotion management, and transformational leadership behaviors can effectively channel conflict in diverse teams toward constructive processes that result in better team morale and performance. We test our ideas using a multiple-source dataset based on a sample of 89 work groups and 585 individuals. Conceptual model and hypotheses The conceptual model guiding our research is shown in Figure 1. Based on prior research and theorizing (Kochan et al., 2003; Mannix and Neale, 2005; Pelled, 1996), we begin with a diversity group processes outcomes model. The dimension of diversity serving as the focus of this study is racioethnicity (Cox, 1993), which is defined as a set of visibly distinguishable identity groups determined on the basis of such features as hair texture, skin color, and facial features and linked to stereotypes and prejudice. Beyond their visible distinctiveness, members of racioethnic groups, such as Chinese,
African American, Australian Aboriginal, and white Canadian, also share distinct cultures, or sets of beliefs, norms, and values that guide desirable goals and behaviors. Specifically, diversity literature distinguishes between underlying deep-level characteristics like attitudes, opinions, information, and values, which take time to emerge in groups (Harrison et al., 1998, 2002; Jehn et al., 1999) and surface-level or observable (e.g. ethnicity, age, and gender; Milliken and Martins, 1996) characteristics that are more immediately apparent (Riordan, 2001). Empirical studies also show that both surface and deep-level diversity make a difference for group outcomes and significantly affect the experiences of the individuals within a team (e.g. Harrison et al., 2002; Milliken and Martins, 1996) and impact group processes ( Jehn et al., 1997, 1999). In practice, the visible and cultural components of racioethnicity are often impossible to disentangle, and theorists must consider both the stereotyping and prejudice based on surface-level differences and the variation in perspectives and values based on deeperlevel cultural differences (Ospina and Foldy, 2009). Julian et al. (2009) report that the higher the cultural diversity in the team, the more highly members evaluate each other in terms of their ability to get along and help each other. Prior research has also linked racioethnic diversity to both task and relationship conflict in teams (Ayoko et al., 2012; Chatman and Flynn, 2001; Pelled et al., 1999), as well as to creativity in generating ideas and solving problems (Cady and Valentine, 1999; Leung et al., 2008). The group processes we focus upon are task and relationship conflict. Jehn (1997) describes task conflict as encompassing conflict of ideas in the group and disagreement about the content and issues of the task. Explicitly, it is the consciousness that there are disagreements about the actual tasks being performed in the group even when groups goals may be shared (Brehmer, 1976). In contrast to task conflict, relationship conflict pertains to disagreements based on personal and social issues that are not related to work ( Jehn and Chatman, 2000). The outcomes of interest are team morale and performance. Particularly, morale is a well-constructed variable in psychology and organizational behavior (e.g. Al-Adaileh and Al-Atawi, 2011; Chang and Lyons, 2012; Marmenout, 2011), with considerable importance for management practice (Pane Haden and Cooke, 2012; Stahl et al., 2012). For example, Rosenbaum and Rosenbaum (1971) examined morale and productivity consequences of group leadership style, stress, and type of task. In their study, they found that students in the absence of stress were more productive. More recently, Iverson and Zatzick (2011) investigated labor productivity and the value of showing consideration for employees morale and welfare. The study demonstrated that organizations with more extensive high performance work systems reduce productivity losses from downsizing by heightening their consideration for employees morale and
Diversity Racioethnic diversity
Group/team processes Task conflict Relationship conflict
Outcomes Performance morale
Leader behaviors Conflict management Emotion management Transformational leadership
Figure 1. Leadership as a moderator of the diversity-conflictperformance relationship
EDI 31,8
698
welfare. Altogether, morale has been consistently shown to have desirable outcomes for the group (e.g. Motowidlo and Borman, 1978). In the present study, we add to prior diversity-process-outcome theorizing by positing leader conflict management, emotion management, and transformational leadership behaviors as moderators of the process-outcome relationship. As such, we conceptualize one of the primary roles of the leader in the diversity-conflict-outcome model to be that of an effective manager of conflict. Hence, effective leaders do not necessarily dampen the workgroup conflicts arising from diversity. Especially, task conflicts should not be prevented because the elaboration of differing viewpoints regarding tasks is a potential source of high performance (Alper et al., 1998; Jehn, 1995; Jehn and Chatman, 2000; Pelled et al., 1999; Phillips and Lloyd, 2006; Van de Vliert and De Dreu, 1994; Van de Vliert et al., 1999; van Knippenberg et al., 2004). Explicitly, van Knippenberg et al. (2004) suggest that diversity research has been associated with inconsistent findings because research in diversity has paid little attention to important moderators. They proposed that team diversity will be linked with elaboration of task-relevant information and perspectives within the group (e.g. group members exchange, discussion, and integration of ideas, knowledge, and insights) relevant to the groups task. Given the on-going discussion, we propose that the group process of conflict is an important feature of the task elaboration process in diverse work teams and that leadership is an important moderator of this process. Therefore, rather than reducing the amount of conflict, we suggest that leaders should help their groups to effectively manage the conflicts that do arise in order to enhance morale and performance. In the next sections, we discuss why conflict management, emotion management, and transformational leadership behaviors in particular are valuable for effective conflict management by leaders of diverse workgroups. Leader conflict management behaviors Many conflict researchers espouse the positive effects of task conflict (De Dreu, 2006; Jehn, 1995, 1997; Simons and Peterson, 2000); however, task conflict can result in negative outcomes for teams if it degenerates into relationship conflict. For example, a task disagreement between a supervisor and a subordinate over time can degenerate to a relationship conflict especially if the subordinate perceives the task conflict as an attempt by the supervisor to put him/her (i.e. employee) down in front of the other team members. Additionally, the results of the meta-analysis conducted by De Dreu and Weingart (2003) found that task conflict was negatively correlated with team performance, the correlation was significantly weaker if task conflict was less strongly correlated with relationship conflict (see also de Wit et al., 2011), denoting the fact that task conflict may be closely connected with relationship conflict. Although a number of studies have examined the moderating role of conflict management in the relationship between intragroup conflict and outcomes (DeChurch and Marks, 2001; Somech et al., 2009; Tekleab et al., 2009), these studies focus on the behaviors of team members and little research has examined the role of the leader in managing conflict in teams (Zaccaro et al., 2001, see Ayoko et al., 2010 for an exception). We argue that leader conflict management behaviors are critical for eliciting positive outcomes from task conflict and also ensuring that task conflict does not degenerate into relationship conflict. Leader conflict management behaviors comprise an understanding of the conflict triggers, the conflict cycle and conflict management behaviors as well as implementation skills. Overall, conflict management behaviors involve understanding ones own and
others conflict management styles. Research shows that employees have an expectation rtel, that group leaders will resolve conflicts between group members (Ayoko and Ha 2002), and third-party involvement is a significant strategy of managing the negative outcomes of interpersonal conflict in organizations (Giebels and Janssen, 2005). In this case, we reason that leaders who actively manage team conflicts are likely to increase group morale because their behavior meets expectations. In the present research, we describe active conflict management strategies as those that involve some assertiveness in dealing with the conflict. These strategies require conflict partners or third parties to use collaborating, compromising, or competing styles for resolutions or to tenaciously persuade one of the conflicting parties (Ohbuchi and Takahashi, 1994). In contrast, passive conflict management strategies are those strategies that are void of selfassertiveness in dealing with conflict such as avoidance and accommodation conflict management styles (see Tang and Kirkbride, 1986; Ohbuchi and Takahashi, 1994). While the outcome of leadership styles is expected to vary across cultures (Brodbeck et al., 2000), Xie et al. (1998) show that passive conflict management (e.g. conflict avoidance) is linked with negative outcomes in four different national cultures. We unpack the different conflict management behaviors below. Five distinct conflict behaviors, i.e., competing, accommodation, collaboration, compromise, and avoidance, are commonly identified in conflict management research (De Dreu et al., 2001; Van de Vliert and Kabanoff, 1990). Competing refers to a situation where each party pursues its own interests (Montoya-Weiss et al., 2001). Accommodation refers to giving in to the opponent (Euwema et al., 2003, p. 121). Collaboration refers to an attempt to reach an outcome that integrates the interests of all involved parties (Montoya-Weiss et al., 2001). Avoidance refers to moving away from the conflict issue (Euwema et al., 2003, p. 121). This behavior is characterized by avoiding confronting other people (Montoya-Weiss et al., 2001). Compromise refers to settling through mutual concessions (Euwema et al., 2003, p. 121). According to Kormanski (1982), each of the conflict management behaviors have both advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, a comprehensive approach to conflict management includes the application of the most appropriate tactic to each conflict event. Leaders who can thoughtfully apply many different conflict management strategies are likely to be the most effective. Prior studies show that comprehensive conflict management can strengthen interpersonal relationships, increase mutual trust and understanding, and enhance willingness to cooperate (Euwema et al., 2003). Furthermore, the ability to use a variety of conflict management strategies is likely to be particularly important for leaders of diverse teams (where members come from differing countries or teams with in-country ethnic differences), because modal practices relating to conflict management vary across cultures (Kamil, 1997; Triandis, 1994). Additionally, the work of Graham et al. (1988) and Kirkbride et al. (1991) shows that collectivist (e.g. Asians) tend to use passive strategies such as avoidance to deal with conflict, whereas westerners (e.g. Americans) tend to confront conflict directly (see also Graham et al., 1988; Kirkbride et al., 1991; Tang and Kirkbride, 1986; Tse et al., 1994). Due to cultural differences in preferred conflict management strategies (Kamil, 1997), leaders who can engage in a comprehensive set of conflict management styles will most likely be effective at managing conflict to create good outcomes in racioethnically diverse groups. Within diverse work groups, comprehensive conflict management behaviors on the part of the leader should interact with task conflict to create favorable outcomes. For instance, the use of collaboration ensures that different perspectives are valued.
EDI 31,8
700
Compromise can ensure divergent interests are considered. Confrontation can increase peoples awareness of differences. Comprehensive conflict management by the leader should also interact with relationship conflict to minimize the negative outcomes of personal animosities and incompatibility. For example, given that a cooperative conflict management style is linked with conflict efficacy and team performance (Alper et al., 2000), we anticipate that a leader who engages in cooperative conflict management behaviors may be modeling cooperative behaviors for group members to imitate. In the same way, a leader who confronts interpersonal antagonism sends a clear signal to group members about expectations of professionalism and respect in the workplace. In summary, employees are likely to expect their leaders to provide third-party assistance when conflicts arise in their groups, and effective conflict management in diverse workgroups is likely to require leader flexibility in using a variety of conflict management styles. Active conflict management should improve the experience, confidence, and understanding leaders have about different methods of managing conflict, leading them to take a more comprehensive conflict management approach. Through an iterative process, active conflict management on the part of leaders is likely to create a positive group process in culturally diverse workgroups, and it may be crucial for increased performance and morale in the team. Active conflict management behavior on the part of the leaders is particularly important because team leaders are likely to have the skills to apply active strategies appropriately in culturally diverse teams. By comparison, passive approaches to conflict, specifically, doing nothing or accommodating the other party, do not require as much skill and may be accomplished by team members without leader input: H1a. Active conflict management on the part of the leader will result in a less negative (or more positive) association between task conflict and the workgroups performance and morale. H1b. Active conflict management on the part of the leader will result in a less negative association between relationship conflict and the workgroups performance and morale. Leader emotion management behaviors Scholars are increasingly integrating emotion into the study of workplace conflict (Bell and Song, 2005; Bodtker and Jameson, 2001; Von Glinow et al., 2004; Yang and Mossholder, 2004). Empirical findings suggest that conflict can invoke potentially damaging negative emotions. For example, verbal communication during conflict has been shown to include personal elements that suggest the escalation of negative emotions (Lovelace et al., 2001). Also, disagreeable approaches to managing conflict such as threats, being condescending, and pressuring others, can involve emotions of anger, frustration, and irritation (Alper et al., 2000; Van de Vliert et al., 1999). The expression of emotions may be exaggerated in the team through the process of emotional contagion (Hatfield et al., 1994). Moreover, disagreements among group members may be interpreted as personal attacks (Simons and Peterson, 2000), regardless of whether the issues involve tasks or relationships among group members, which may explain why meta-analysis finds that both task and relationship conflict are associated with detrimental group outcomes (De Dreu and Weingart, 2003). Given that diversity is associated with conflict in groups, these findings suggest that for teams to
benefit from diversity, group leaders must be able to manage the negative emotions triggered by both task and relationship conflict. Specifically, Pescosolido (2002) proposes a new role for group leaders the manager of group emotions. He argues that a leader who manages group emotions will be able to reduce uncertainty and create shared emotion within the group by modeling particular emotional responses. Nevertheless, empirical research on the management of emotions in groups by leaders is limited, especially those emotions related to conflict in culturally diverse groups. The lack of studies in this area is not surprising as the organizational behavior literature has predominantly revolved around cognition rather than feelings (George, 2000). However, scholars have proposed that emotion management behaviors increase information-processing capability in ways that enhance employees ability to motivate, plan, and achieve (Salovey and Mayer, 1990). The successful regulation of emotions allows individuals to refocus their own and others attention on important organizational problems (Salovey and Mayer, 1990). Conversely, if negative emotions are not processed and resolved in a constructive way, group efficiency and effectiveness suffer ( Jehn, 1997). Furthermore, leaders who manage workgroup emotions may help employees express their emotional reactions to conflict appropriately. Suppression of conflictrelated emotions can lead to anxiety and self-righteousness (Tjosvold, 1998), but when these emotions are appropriately expressed, they can affirm interdependency and focus energy on solving underlying problems (Tjosvold, 1998; Tjosvold and Su, 2007). According to Plutchick (1987), empathy is a core social awareness skill that involves the sharing of both positive and negative emotions that should promote a bond between team members. This bond, created through emphatic team interactions and behaviors, should combine to produce an emotional atmosphere conducive to increased cohesion and performance (Rapisarda, 2002) and less conflict. In this regard, Ayoko et al. (2008) found that teams with less-well-defined emotional intelligence climates (e.g. empathic concerns) were associated with increased task and relationship conflict and increased conflict intensity. Thus, consistent with research on emotional intelligence (Van Rooy and Viswesvaran, 2003), we propose that leaders of culturally diverse workgrous need to be aware of their own personal emotions, aware of others emotions, and use emotions (e.g. empathy) appropriately in decision making and problem solving, especially in situations of conflict. Leaders with high levels of emotion management behaviors should therefore be better able to manage team conflict and its related emotions effectively. Thus, we hypothesize that: H2a. Emotion management on the part of the leader will result in a less negative (or more positive) association between task conflict and the workgroups performance and morale. H2b. Emotion management on the part of the leader will result in a less negative association between relationship conflict and the workgroups performance and morale. Transformational leadership behaviors Transformational leadership has been linked to emotion, which suggests that transformational leadership behaviors might be valuable for effectively managing emotion-laden conflicts in teams. Cherulnik et al. (2001) argue that transformational behaviors flow from the leaders level of confidence, enthusiasm, and awareness of the
EDI 31,8
702
emotional needs of members, and that transformational leadership impacts the affective state of the group by eliciting emotional arousal in group members. George (2000) argues that transformational leadership is primarily based on emotional processes, including the ability to appraise others emotions as well as effectively portray emotions (see also, Prati et al., 2003). Given that transformational leadership involves the management of ones own and others emotions, leaders who engage in transformational behaviors are likely to be able to manage team conflicts in ways that minimize the negative repercussions of emotional displays and heated exchanges. Transformational leaders also engage in higher levels of individualized consideration, inspiration, motivation, and intellectual stimulation in their relations with their followers (Avolio and Yammarino, 2002; Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999). In particular, transformational leaders inspire their members to achieve a vision, and members feel highly motivated and strongly connected to their leader (Bass et al., 2003). We focus on communication of vision and related leader behaviors. Although transformational leadership theory does not explicitly consider the management of team conflicts, the nature of transformational leadership provides team members with a shared goal, vision, values, and relationship to the leader that can serve as the foundation of constructive resolution of team conflicts. In this regard, Ayoko and Callan (2010) show that leader behaviors that involved higher levels of inspiration and communication of vision by leaders were directly associated with lower levels of bullying by team members. Specifically, a shared goal or vision for the teams mission provides a common purpose against which to assess the different views expressed during task conflicts. A shared vision also provides the parties with a commonality of interests, which can motivate them to settle their differences. As a result of these motivational processes, transformational leadership behaviors result in enhanced outcomes on measures of employee morale and performance. Meta-analysis has documented positive links between transformational leadership and follower job satisfaction (r 0.58), follower satisfaction with the leader (r 0.71), follower motivation (r 0.53), leader job performance (r 0.27), leader effectiveness (r 0.64), and group or organizational performance (r 0.26). Furthermore, the separate dimensions of transformational leadership all show similarly substantial positive meta-analytic associations with performance (rs from 0.60 to 0.71) (Lowe et al., 1996). Additionally, transformational leaders are known for their capacity to induce high degree of excitement and enthusiasm in their followers (Berlew, 1974). This means that transformational leadership has the potential to improve the followers morale (Shamir et al., 1998). In particular, morale tends to be futuristic and Motowidlo and Borman (1978) describe morale as linked with satisfaction, motivation, high energy, and enthusiasm. It is also connected with zest (Peterson et al., 2009) and a sense of collective purpose and goals (Locke, 1976). According to Shamir et al. (1998), units with high levels of morale have been linked with high performance (see also Motowidlo and Borman, 1978). Given the above and the fact that transformational leadership is interested in meeting the individual team members at his/her point of needs, we anticipate that in the context of conflict, transformational leaders will be able to improve the team members morale and performance: H3a. Transformational behaviors on the part of the leader will result in a less negative (or more positive) association between task conflict and the workgroups performance and morale.
H3b. Transformational behaviors on the part of the leader will result in a less negative association between relationship conflict and the workgroups performance and morale. Methodology Data Data for this study were collected between 2000 and 2001 from workgroups in eight public service organizations in Australia. Using mailing labels, questionnaires were mailed to participants. Additionally, the first author and the gatekeeper administered majority of the questionnaire. Altogether, questionnaires were sent to a total of 1,200 employees resulting in a 55 percent response rate (n 660 in 122 workgroups). The above average response rate may be attributed to the fact that, in most cases and after several reminders, the first author personally went back to collect the completed surveys in sealed envelopes. The sample consists of groups that were comprised of a leader and at least four other individuals who identified themselves as a group and worked on tasks that were interdependent (Brett and Rognes, 1986). We screened data for outliers, input errors, and missing values (Burns and Burns, 2008). Analysis did not show a particular fixed pattern of missing value, and since the sample size exceeded 200 participants, all cases with missing data were excluded from further analysis (Tabachnick and Fiddel, 1996). We also tested data for normality and analysis showed that the data were normally distributed. Additionally, we excluded teams that identified more than one leader as this situation does not allow for an accurate assessment of leader behaviors (i.e. group members may differ in their ratings of leader behaviors because they are thinking of different focal persons as the leader). We also deleted teams where a leader was not identified. Overall, 585 group members in 89 groups were fit for analysis. Altogether, 58.5 percent of the participants were male while 41.5 percent were female. The majority (31.7 percent) of the participants were 41-50 years old. Measures Racioethnic diversity. The sampled employees represented a wide variety of racioethnic groups, but by far, the largest cultural group was white/Anglo, and 57 of the 89 groups in the sample were 100 percent white. However, in an average group size of seven to ten people, there was an average of two to three non-Caucasians in the remaining 32 groups. The sample appears to be representative of the countrys population at the point of data collection. To examine the impact of the presence of racioethnic diversity in these workgroups, we created dummy variable indicating groups as 100 percent white/homogeneous (1) or diverse (0). Group processes (conflict). Group members reported on the amount of task and relationship conflict in their workgroups. Task conflict was measured with a three-item scale adapted from Jehn (1995). We measured task conflict with adapted items from Jehn (1995) such as the disagreement in my workgroup is about opinions regarding the work being done, the disagreement in my workgroup is about ideas. All items used a five-point scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. Relationship conflict was measured by two items also adapted from Jehn (1995) such as Disagreements often result in emotional outbursts among group members. Both items used a five-point scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. Both task and relationship conflict measures were reliable (for task conflict, a 0.86; for relationship conflict, a 0.87). Task and relationship conflict were measured by aggregating individual scores to the group level.
EDI 31,8
704
Leader behaviors. All leader behaviors were assessed by aggregating team members ratings of their leader. Leaders conflict management behaviors were measured by using an adaptation of the six-item Likert type Rahims (1983) conflict management scale. The items on the scale measured leader conflict management behaviors such as use of power (force), cooperation, use of a third party, providing privacy and allocation to differing projects for parties in disagreement (a 0.60). Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) suggest that a co-efficient above 0.60 indicates reliability between the items in a scale. We measured leaders emotion management behaviors by using a five-item Likert subscale of the WEIP Version 5 (Jordan et al., 2002). The WEIP subscale assessing ability to manage others emotions includes items such as When I am angry with a member of my team, I can overcome that emotion quickly. I am aware of how others in the team are feeling, When I talk to a team member, I can gauge their reactions from their facial expression, When I am angry with a member of my team, I can overcome that emotion quickly (a 0.75). Finally, we measured leader transformational behaviors using the Project Leadership Questionnaire (Bain and Mann, 1997; see also, Pirola-Merlo et al., 2002). The five-item Likert scale based on Bass et al. (2003) concept of transformational leadership, assesses how well leaders: facilitate positive working relationships among group members (e.g. engaging in activities to build relationships within the team), and create a sense of vision and pride for the group (e.g. communicating a vision of the projects possibilities) (a 0.89). Group outcomes. Group performance was assessed by the group leader, who responded to the following three questions, How well do those people who report directly to you perform generally as a group? How well do those people that report directly to you perform generally as individuals?, and How effective is your workgroup? Leaders used five response options ranging from 1 not at all effective to 5 very effective (a 0.78). Group morale was measured with five items developed by Hart et al. (1996). The reliability of this index was a 0.92 (see also, Griffin et al., 2000; Miller et al., 1999; Neal et al., 2000). Sample items include, I feel enthusiastic at work, I feel cheerful at work, and I feel delighted at work. All items used a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. Individual responses were aggregated to the group level to measure morale. Most of the measurement instruments used in this study was adapted from pre-existing scales. Analysis Factor analysis. Three major steps have been identified for factor analysis: a correlation matrix is created to determine the appropriateness of the data for factor analysis, factor extraction is conducted to assess the number of factors present, and rotation of the factor structure is undertaken to make the results more interpretable (Coakes and Steed, 2001). In the present study, an initial exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine the underlying structure of the data. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to maximize the variance in the data (Tabachnick and Fidell, 1996). All data were analyzed using SPSS. Also, factor loadings were examined across the analyses and final factors were based on the most consistent factor structure. All items that cross-loaded in the process of decoupling scales were dropped. Aggregation of group-level data. Aggregation of group member responses to create measures of group-level constructs must be justified by examining measures of
within-group agreement, such as ANOVA, rWG(J) (Cohen et al., 2001), ICC(1) and ICC(2) (McGraw and Wong, 1996). A series of one-way ANOVAs showed a greater than chance similarity among group members on all group-level constructs ( pso0.01). The significant ANOVA findings allowed us to proceed with the computation of rWG(J), ICC(1), and ICC(2) for the constructs (Bliese, 2000). Findings were as follows: task conflict (rWG(J) 0.60, ICC(1) 0.24, ICC(2) 0.49), relationship conflict (rWG( J) 0.57, ICC(1) 0.39, ICC(2) 0.66), leader conflict management behaviors (rWG( J) 0.94, ICC(1) 0.27, ICC(2) 0.99), leader communication of vision (r WG ( J ) 0.69, ICC(1) 0.55, ICC(2) 0.79), leader emotion management (rWG( J) 0.88, ICC(1) 0.50, ICC(2) 0.55), and group morale (rWG(J) 0.95, ICC(1) 0.054, ICC(2) 0.78). Although no absolute standard value for aggregation based on rWG( J) and ICC have been established, an rWG( J) Z0.70 and ICC(1) values exceeding 0.05 are considered sufficient to warrant aggregation (Bliese, 2000). Glick (1985) suggests an ICC(2) value of 0.60 or above as a cut-off point to justify aggregation. We note that the rWG( J) or ICC scores for conflict scales were approaching the cut-off point. This is not uncommon (see Greer et al., 2008; Tjosvold et al., 2005). Consequently, we follow Greer et al. (2008); Tjosvold and colleagues (2005) to conclude that the within-team ratings were homogenous enough to warrant aggregation to the team level. Based on the above results, our group-level constructs approached, met, or exceeded these standards, justifying the aggregated measures used in this study. Control variables. In all analyses, we controlled for group size, gender as well as a set of dummy variables indicating the groups organization. We also controlled for gender and it has no significant impact on the variables of interest in this study. Analytic strategy. We used hierarchical regression analysis to test the hypotheses regarding group performance and morale. In Step 1, we entered the control variables (i.e. organization dummies, and group size). In Step 2, we entered the independent variable of racioethnic diversity, assessed by a dummy variable where 1 homogeneous team (100 percent white) and 0 diverse team (o100 percent white). In Step 3, we entered either the task conflict or the relationship conflict measure, as these two measures were correlated to enter into the same prediction equation (r 0.68). Finally, in Step 4, we entered the multiplicative interactions between the two types of conflict and the three leader behaviors to predict the group outcomes. H1a, H2a, and H3a predicted that leadership would moderate the impact of task conflict on group performance and morale, and H1b, H2b, and H3b predicted that leadership would moderate the impact of relationship conflict on group outcomes. To test mediation and moderation, we followed the procedure outlined by Baron and Kenny (1986). According to Baron and Kenny, four conditions are critical to the testing of mediation. First, the independent variable (i.e. racioethnic diversity) must be significantly related to a mediator (i.e. task and relationship conflict). Second, diversity must be significantly related to the outcome variables of performance and morale. Third, task and relationship conflict must be significantly related to performance and morale, respectively. Finally, the relationship between diversity and the outcomes of performance and morale must be significantly reduced when task or relationship conflict is introduced to the regression equations, as assessed by the Sobel test (MacKinnon and Dwyer, 1993; MacKinnon et al., 1995). The above procedure is sufficient for testing the diversity-process-outcomes model; however, our figure depicts a moderated mediation model and requires a more sophisticated calculation of effects. Moderation is assessed by examining the significance of the increase in R2 when the multiplicative interaction between the IV
EDI 31,8
and the moderator is entered into the regression equation. Given a significant increase in R2, the form of the interaction must be investigated by calculating and plotting simple slopes and regions of significance. Moderated mediation takes this process one step further to calculate the extent to which the moderator influences the strength of a mediated effect. We used the formulas provided by Preacher et al. (2007) to test for moderated mediation. Results Table I presents means, SD, and correlations among the study variables. The relationships between racioethnic diversity, conflict (task and relationship), and group morale and group performance were first examined by correlation (see Table I). Diversity was not significantly correlated with either type of conflict or with either outcome variable. Task conflict was significantly negatively correlated with both group performance and group morale, consistent with the findings of De Dreu and Weingarts (2003) meta-analysis. Relationship conflict was significantly negatively correlated with team morale, and non-significantly correlated with team performance. Regression analyses (Table II) showed that when group size and organization were controlled, group diversity was a positive predictor of task conflict ( po0.05, using onetailed test for directional prediction) but was unrelated to relationship conflict ( p40.20). Hence, the diversity-process-outcomes model is potentially supported for task conflict, but not for relationship conflict in our data. Table III shows the regression analyses predicting group performance as assessed by leaders, and Table IV shows the regression analyses predicting group morale as reported by group members and aggregated to the group level. Step 1 of the regressions showed that diversity was not a significant predictor of either group performance or morale when group size and organization were controlled. Step 2 showed that both task conflict and relationship conflict ( pso0.05, using one-tailed tests for directional predictions) were significantly negatively associated with both group performance and morale, supporting the meta-analytic conclusions of De Dreu and Weingart (2003). Hypothesis tests H1a and H1b predicted that active conflict management on the part of the leader would weaken the negative association of task and relationship conflict, respectively, with
706
Mean SD 1.Diversity 2.Team leader conflict management 3.Transformational leadership 4.Team leader emotional management 5.Relationship conflict 6.Task conflict 7.Team performance 8.Team morale n 0.64 2.56 3.69 3.82 1.96 2.53 3.84 3.41 89 0.48 0.49 0.46 0.35 0.60 0.56 0.68 0.49
1 1.00 0.14 0.13 0.04 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.12
1.00 0.16 1.00 0.28 0.49 1.00 0.10 0.19 0.13 1.00 0.23 0.40 0.20 0.68 1.00 0.28 0.48 0.39 0.22 0.36 1.00 0.13 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.28 1.00
Table I. Means, SDs, and correlations
Notes: Correlations 40.276 were significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed);correlations 40.277 were significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
Variable
Model 1 b step Final b
Task conflict Model 2 b step Final b Model 3 b step Final b
Relationship conflict Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 b step Final b b step Final b b step Final b
Group size 0.15 0.19*** 0.15 0.20*** 0.15 0.20* 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.13 Organization controlled Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 DR Step 1 0.16*** 0.16*** 0.16*** 0.26** 0.26** 0.26** Group diversity (0 yes, 1 no) 0.23*** 0.21*** 0.23*** 0.22*** 0.23*** 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.06 DR2 Step 2 0.04*** 0.04*** 0.04*** 0.01 0.01 0.01 Leader conflict management 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.05 Leader emotion management 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 Transformational leadership 0.43** 0.43** 0.20*** 0.20*** DR2 Step 3 0.01 0.01 0.16** 0.00 0.00 0.04*** Adjusted R2 0.21* 0.21* 0.28** 0.28** 0.27** 0.22**
Notes: Number of groups 87. ***po0.10; *p o0.05; **po0.01, two-tailed tests
Table II. Regressions predicting conflict reported by group members
EDI 31,8
708
Predictor
Group size 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 Group diversity (0 yes, 1 no) 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.05 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.04 0.13 0.02 Organization controlled Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes DR2 Step 1 0.26** 0.26** 0.26** 0.26** 0.26** 0.26** Task conflict 0.35** 0.63 0.35** 2.01* 0.35** 1.52* Relationship conflict 0.19*** 0.02 0.19*** 03.29* 0.19*** 1.32* DR2 Step 2 0.10** 0.03*** 0.10** 0.03*** 0.10** 0.03*** Leader conflict management 0.18*** 0.44 0.23* 0.08 Leader emotion management 0.32** 0.40 0.36** 0.61*** Transformational leadership 0.51** 0.34 0.54** 0.07 DR2 Step 3 0.03*** 0.04* 0.09** 0.12** 0.18** 0.25** Interaction 0.44 0.44 0.29 0.29 1.82*** 1.82*** 3.23** 3.23** 1.36* 1.36* 1.32*** 1.32*** DR2 Step 4 0.00 0.00 0.02*** 0.06** 0.03* 0.02*** Adjusted R2 0.29** 0.22** 0.39** 0.38** 0.49** 0.48**
Notes: Number of groups 84. ***po0.10; *po0.05; **po0.01, two-tailed tests
Table III. Regressions predicting group performance as assessed by leaders Leader conflict management Model 1 Model 2 b step Final b b step Final b Moderator Leader Emotion management Model 3 Model 4 b step Final b b step Final b Transformational leadership Model 5 Model 6 b step Final b b step Final b
Predictor 0.06 0.13 Yes 0.82 1.23 0.64*** 0.62 0.19 0.02 1.29 0.03 0.04*** 1.45 1.45 0.02 0.11*** 1.29 0.14* 0.21*** 0.03*** 0.06 0.20*** 1.73* 0.07* 0.96* 0.17 0.00 1.41 1.41 0.02 0.11*** 0.01 1.87* 1.87* 0.05* 0.11*** 0.03 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.12* 0.05 0.12 Yes 0.15 0.29* 0.12 0.19 Yes 0.05 0.12 Yes 0.15 0.04 0.16 Yes
Moderator Leader conflict management Leader emotion management Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 b step Final b b step Final b b step Final b b step Final b
Transformational leadership Model 5 Model 6 b step Final b b step Final b 0.05 0.20 Yes 0.38 0.05 0.12 0.05 0.12 0.22 0.12 Yes Yes Yes 0.15 0.15 0.29* 1.56*** 0.21*** 0.07* 0.03***
Group size Group diversity (0 yes, 1 no) Organization controlled DR2 Step 1 Task conflict Relationship conflict DR2 Step 2 Leader conflict management Leader emotion management Transformational leadership DR2 Step 3 Interaction DR2 Step 4 Adjusted R2
0.05 0.08 0.05 0.11 0.14 0.12 Yes Yes Yes 0.15 0.15 0.29* 1.26*** 0.21*** 0.07* 0.03*** 0.03 0.83 0.08
0.25* 0.49 0.05* 0.55 0.55 0.01 0.11***
Notes: Number of groups 86. ***po0.10; *po0.05, two-tailed tests
Table IV. Regressions predicting group morale as reported by group members
EDI 31,8
710
group performance and morale. Step 4 of the regression equations depicted in Tables III and IV indicated that the multiplicative interaction between leader conflict management and relationship conflict predicted a significant additional amount of variance in the outcome of group morale. The form of the interaction is shown in Figure 2, which depicts plots of simple slopes at the sample mean (2.56), one SD below the mean (2.07) and one SD above the mean (3.05). Calculation of the region of significance indicated that the simple slope of the association between relationship conflict (x-axis) and morale (y-axis) was negative and significant when the rating of leader conflict management was o2.67. The simple slope was non-significant when leader conflict management was rated at 2.67 or higher. Hence, leaders had to score somewhat above the sample mean of 2.56 in conflict management to prevent relationship conflict from damaging group morale. The other three interactions between leader conflict management and task/ relationship conflict did not add significantly to the variance accounted for in performance or morale. Hence, H1a was not supported, and H1b was partially supported. H2a and H2b predicted that leader emotion management would weaken the negative association of task and relationship conflict, respectively, with group performance and morale. Step 4 of the regression equations in Tables III and IV showed that leader emotion management interacted significantly with both task and relationship conflict to predict group performance, but not morale. The form of the interaction between leader emotion management and task conflict is shown in Figure 3, which depicts plots of simple slopes at the sample mean (3.82), one SD below the mean (3.47) and one SD above the mean (4.17). Calculation of the region of significance indicated that the simple slope of the association between task conflict (x-axis) and performance (y-axis) was negative and significant when the rating of leader emotion
3.9 3.8 3.7 Performance 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3
CVz1 (1) CVz1 (2) CVz1 (3) 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6
Figure 2. Moderating effect of leader conflict management on association between relationship conflict and performance
Notes: Relationship conflict CVz1, low leader conflict management; CVz2, mean leader conflict management; CVz3, high leader conflict management
4.2
4.0
Performance
3.8
3.6
3.4 CVz1 (1) CVz1 (2) CVz1 (3) 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0
3.2
Notes: Task conflict CVz1, low leader emotion management; CVz2, mean leader emotion management; CVz3, high leader emotion management
Figure 3. Form of moderating effect of leader on associations between conflict and performance
management was o4.00. The simple slope was non-significant when leader emotion management was rated at 4.00 or higher. Hence, leaders had to score somewhat above the sample mean of 3.82 in emotion management to prevent task conflict from damaging group performance. The interaction effect of leader emotion management and relationship conflict on group performance was similar in form to that depicted in Figure 3. Calculation of the region of significance indicated that the simple slope of the association between relationship conflict and performance was negative and significant when the rating of leader emotion management was o3.89. The simple slope was non-significant when leader emotion management was rated at 3.89 or higher. Hence, leaders had to score somewhat above the sample mean of 3.82 in emotion management to prevent relationship conflict from damaging group performance. In sum, the results for group performance supported H2a and H2b, while the results for group morale were nonsignificant. H3a and H3b predicted that leader transformational behaviors would weaken the negative association of task and relationship conflict, respectively, with group performance and morale. Step 4 in the regression equations depicted in Tables III and IV indicated that the multiplicative interaction between leader transformational behavior and both task and relationship conflict was a significant predictor of group performance, but not morale. Both of these interactions were similar in form to Figure 3. Calculation of the region of significance indicated that the simple slope of the association between task conflict (x-axis) and performance (y-axis) was negative and significant when the rating of leader transformational behavior was o3.59. The simple slope was non-significant when leader transformational behavior was rated at 3.59 or higher. Hence, leaders scoring somewhat below the sample mean of 3.69 in transformational behavior were able to prevent task conflict from damaging group performance.
EDI 31,8
712
The region of significance showed that the simple slope of the association between relationship conflict (x-axis) and performance ( y-axis) was negative and significant when the rating of leader transformational behavior was o3.22. The simple slope was non-significant when leader transformational behavior was rated at 3.22 or higher. Hence, leaders scoring somewhat below the sample mean of 3.69 in technical skill were able to prevent relationship conflict from damaging group performance. In sum, the results for group performance supported H3a and H3b, while the results for group morale were non-significant. Test for moderated mediation We calculated tests for moderated mediation to determine whether the indirect effect of diversity on performance via task conflict was moderated by leader behavior. Findings for leader emotion management provided some support for our conceptual model, depicted in Figure 1. At a low level of emotion management (one SD below the sample mean), the indirect effect of diversity on group performance showed a non-significant negative tendency (z 1.67, po0.10). The indirect effect of diversity on group performance was non-significant at the mean level of leader emotion management (z 1.63, ns) and at a high level of emotion management (one SD above the mean) (z 0.95, ns). None of the other findings supported our prediction of moderated mediation, probably because diversity was not a significant direct predictor of the outcome variables. Discussion The findings of this study indicate that leadership may be an important contextual factor affecting the outcomes of conflicts in work teams. Significant moderator effects indicated that leader emotion management mitigated the negative effect of relationship conflict on team performance, and leader transformational behaviors mitigated the negative effects of both task and relationship conflict on team performance. Leader conflict management eliminated the negative effect of relationship conflict on team morale. Hence, the findings of this study demonstrate the value of effective leadership for managing team conflicts, which is a contribution to prior work showing the value of effective conflict management tactics by team members (Ayoko et al., 2012; DeChurch and Marks, 2001; Somech et al., 2009; Tekleab et al., 2009). A moderated mediation effect was found indicating that leader emotion management is valuable for reducing the negative impact of task conflict on performance in diverse teams. Task conflict arising from racioethnic diversity can lead to negative emotions, due to the difficulties associated with social categorization processes (van Knippenberg et al., 2004). In particular, research has shown that ethnicity and race are fundamental to observable heterogeneity, which more often than not arouse responses in others based on categorization (such as biases, prejudices, or stereotypes) (Milliken and Martins, 1996) through social identification and self-categorization. In fact, the study by Meeus et al. (2010) shows that the more people identify with their in-group members, the more likely they are to view their in-group in more ethnic terms. This, in turn, can lead them to exhibit more ethnic prejudices. In the same study, group identification is shown to be positively related to ethnic prejudices, such that people who identify strongly with their in-group increasingly adopt a more ethnic identity representation that eventually is positively associated with increases in ethnic prejudices. Altogether, identification and categorization of individuals into
different groups can provoke hostility or animosity within the workgroup that may trigger negative emotions. Additionally, the finding that leader emotion management moderates the negative impact of task conflicts arising from diversity indicates the critical value of leaders who are aware of the potential negative emotional outcomes of task conflict in diverse teams. This finding supports prior theory arguing that leaders must manage team members emotions during conflicts in order to avoid the development of a negative group emotional history (Kelly and Barsade, 2001) and resulting damage to important work attitudes driving decisions to work productively, to behave cooperatively, and to remain with the organization (Ashkanasy et al., 2002). Recently, other researchers have documented that leadership is important for generating positive outcomes in diverse teams, such as enhancing performance (Kearney and Gebert, 2009; Stewart and Johnson, 2009) and reducing turnover (Nishii and Mayer, 2009). In particular, Kearney and Gebert (2009) find that transformational leadership moderates the impact of diversity on the elaboration and effective processing of task-relevant information in teams. Hence, these authors considered leadership as a moderator of the diversity-process relationship in the diversity-process-outcomes model, while we considered leadership as a moderator of the process-outcomes relationship in that model. Our two sets of findings need not be viewed as contradictory, however, because they were examining the process of elaboration, while we were examining the processes of task and relationship conflict. Their elaboration measure assessed whether workers believed that their fellow team members openly share their knowledge, carefully consider all information and perspectives, and generate high-quality ideas and solutions. Their findings showed that when transformational leadership was high, diversity was positively associated with elaboration of information, and when transformational leadership was low, diversity was negatively associated with elaboration. Furthermore, elaboration was positively associated with performance. Hence, leaders who can enhance the elaboration process in diverse teams can generate higher performance by doing so. Our conflict measures, on the other hand, asked workers to report on the extent to which team members disagreed with each other on task and relationship issues. Team diversity was a positive predictor of task conflict in our regressions, and task conflict was a negative predictor of both performance and morale reiterating the findings of De Dreu and Weingart (2003). Prior theorists have argued, however, that task conflict is valuable because it provides the team with greater variety in perspectives and information that can inform more effective and creative decisions (Jehn, 1995; Jehn and Mannix, 2001; Van de Vliert and De Dreu, 1994). Our findings provided clear support for the value of leadership behaviors for reducing the negative effects of conflicts on performance and morale in workgroups. We found less support for the moderated mediation of leadership in the diversity-conflict-outcomes model, although we do document that the indirect effect of diversity on performance via task conflict was moderated by leader emotion management. Hence, leader emotion management in particular was effective for ensuring that task conflicts did not result in poorer team performance in diverse teams. In summary, together, our findings show that leadership can serve to maximize the effectiveness of diverse work teams by both ensuring that diversity leads to positive elaboration processes (Kearney and Gebert, 2009) and ensuring that conflicts do not lead to negative performance outcomes (findings of this study).
EDI 31,8
714
Diversity showed the predicted positive association with task conflict in work groups, but both task and relationship conflicts were negatively associated with the outcome variables of group performance and morale. It is possible that the groups sampled in this study were not diverse enough to generate a diversity advantage, because in many cases, we were comparing all-white groups to groups with only about two-three members of other ethno-cultural groups. To have a positive impact on group performance, the perspective of those in the numerical minority must be processed by the group, and this is only likely to happen if the minority opinion is expressed firmly and consistently (Nemeth, 1986, 1992). People in the numerical minority in groups are less likely to speak out with confidence if they are solos or constitute o15 percent of the group (Kanter, 1977; Sekaquaptewa and Thompson, 2002; Thompson and Sekaquaptewa, 2002). Studies with a greater range of diversity in groups may be more likely to demonstrate value from diversity. Additionally, given that the deep-level diversity indices take more time to emerge in groups (Harrison et al., 1998, 2002; Jehn et al., 1999) while the surface-level characteristics (e.g. ethnicity, age gender) are more immediately apparent (Riordan, 2001), there is a possibility that the teams sampled in this study have not been together enough to get pass the interaction hurdles (posed by visible dissimilarity) to positive outcomes of diversity. Although we did not have a strong-moderated mediation effect, leadership did moderate the negative relationships between the two types of conflict and group outcomes. In particular, leader emotion management was effective for reducing the negative impact of both task and relationship conflict on group performance. This finding extends the growing literature on emotions in organizations (Brockner and Higgins, 2001) by linking it to the critical process of conflict management. Specifically, leaders rated as somewhat above the mean on emotion management were able to mitigate the negative effects of task and relationship conflict so that they did not damage group performance. Leaders rated lower on emotion management had lower group performance under conditions of conflict. Hence, our findings show that leadership can be a powerful tool for dealing with one of the most distressing forms of organizational behavior that is, relationship conflicts between organization members who have to work together. Leader transformational behaviors were also useful for reducing the negative impact of conflict on group performance. Leaders rated as near average or higher on transformational behaviors were able to minimize the negative impact of task and relationship conflict on group performance. Less skilled leadership resulted in poorer performance under conditions of conflict. Therefore, we conclude that leadership development is critically important to organizational performance, and that many of the group leaders in our sample were insufficiently skilled to handle group conflict effectively. Active conflict management strategies undertaken by the leader reduced the magnitude of the negative association between relationship conflict and employee morale, as predicted. Leader active conflict management did not moderate the link between task conflict and employee morale, the link between task conflict and team performance, or the link between relationship conflict and team performance, however. These surprising findings may be due to the nature of the active conflict management strategies included in our measure. We included power (force), cooperation, use of a third party, providing privacy and allocation to differing projects for parties in disagreement as components of active conflict management. Some of these strategies, likely require considerable skill for effective implementation in diverse teams
experiencing conflicts. In the absence of such skill, some of these tactics could have negative repercussions, particularly the use of power or force (Weider-Hatfield and Hatfield, 1996). By comparison, less skilled application of emotion management or transformational leadership is unlikely to create negative outcomes; rather, lack of skill in these instances likely has neutral or no impact. As such, the results of active conflict management strategies may be less consistently positive than the results of emotion management or transformational leadership. Practical implications Based on our results, in order to prevent negative emotions from task and relationship conflict from damaging group performance, leaders of diverse groups can act to manage those emotions among their group members. Also, because meta-analytic results show that both task and relationship conflicts can result in poorer performance (De Dreu and Weingart, 2003) and the complex relationship between task conflict and performance (de Wit et al., 2011), leaders may wish to reduce conflict in diverse teams. Based on this thinking, we argue that leaders should not try to diminish the conflicts arising from team diversity, but rather, employ conflict management strategies to manage intra-group conflicts effectively to produce positive outcomes. A leader who is able to manage the conflict effectively may be able to reduce negative emotions and increase group morale and performance. Finally, our results show that leaders transformational behaviors (e.g. communication of vision) to the group members reduced the effect of conflict on group performance. Altogether, these results have implications for organizational leadership and managers. For example, leadership training is implicated. Leadership development programs should include conflict and emotions management skills as well as ability to provide a vision and direction for team members. Also, given the success of leadership intervention in the present research, organizational and team leadership should continue to model leadership behaviors (e.g. emotions/conflict management) that can assist in shaping team norms and climate that will be effective in reducing conflict. Limitations and future research directions Like all empirical studies, this study has its limitations. A greater amount of variation in the diversity of work groups included in the sample would have been useful for overcoming problems of restriction of range, which likely reduced our ability to observe an association between diversity and group outcomes. The sample is very rich, however, and utilizes previously published measures of leadership, conflict, and group outcomes. Every effort was made during data collection to include diverse workgroups in the eight participating organizations. In the end, only 36 percent of the sampled groups had non-white member. This limitation is shared by many studies of racioethnic diversity (Proudford and Nkomo, 2006). The associations observed between group members aggregated ratings of conflict and morale are threatened by the possibility of common methods bias. Although the conflict and morale measures are only moderately correlated (rs 0.29, po0.01), the possibility exists that those associations are partly due to the fact that the same people rated both concepts at the same time on the same survey. The findings observed for group performance are not subject to common methods bias concerns, however. The predictor, conflict, was provided by group members, while the performance outcome was provided by group leaders. Most of the findings supporting the moderating effect of leadership on the association between conflict and group
EDI 31,8
716
outcomes were observed for group performance, and as such, common methods bias is not a concern for most of the important findings of this study. Additionally, the reliability score of the conflict management scale in the present study was on the low side and the statistics justifying aggregation approached the commonly accepted point. Although, Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) advised that a co-efficient of 0.60 should not be a concern, caution should be taken in generalizing the results related to this variable. Also, we acknowledge that other factors may be contributory in heightening the influence of task conflict in the study. Overall, the above shows that most managers and group leaders lack the skills or motivation to address conflict in workgroups. Conflict management training is therefore indicated. Training enhances both individual (Wege and Moeller, 1995) and group performance (Firestein and McCowan, 1988; Stout et al., 1997). While training for conflict management is beyond the scope of this research, further research should examine the issue. Conclusion Leadership is a valuable resource to organizations dealing with conflict in groups. Although both task and relationship conflict show a negative direct effect on group performance and morale, effective conflict management, emotion management, and transformational behaviors on the part of leaders neutralized those negative effects. Diversity is associated with greater task conflict, which in turn, is linked to poorer performance and morale outcomes. The positive moderating effect of leadership on the conflict-outcomes relationship shows the importance of leadership in diverse workplaces.
References Al-Adaileh, R.M. and Al-Atawi, M.S. (2011), Organizational culture impact on knowledge exchange: Saudi telecom context, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 212-30. Alper, S., Tjosvold, D. and Law, K.S. (1998), Interdependence and controversy in group decision making: antecedents to effective self-managing teams, Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, Vol. 74 No. 1, pp. 33-52. Alper, S., Tjosvold, D. and Law, K.S. (2000), Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 625-42. rtel, C.E.J. and Daus, C.S. (2002), Diversity and emotion: the new frontiers in Ashkanasy, N.M., Ha organizational behavior research, Journal of Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 307-38. Ayoko, O.B. and Callan, V.J. (2010), Teams reactions to conflict and teams task and social outcomes: the moderating role of transformational and emotional leadership, European Management Journal, Vol. 28 pp. 220-35. rtel, C.E.J. (2002), The role of emotion and emotion management in destructive Ayoko, O.B. and Ha rtel, and productive conflict in culturally heterogeneous workgroups, in Ashkanasy, N.M., Ha C.E.J. and Zerbe, W.J. (Eds), Managing Emotions in the Workplace, M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, No. 2, pp. 77-97. rtel, C.E.J. (2008), The influence of team emotional intelligence Ayoko, O.B., Callan, V.J. and Ha climate on conflict and team members reactions to conflict, Small Group Research, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 121-49. rtel, C.E.J. and Callan, V.J. (2002), Resolving the puzzle of productive and Ayoko, O.B., Ha destructive conflict in culturally heterogeneous workgroups: a communication accommodation theory approach, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 165-95. Ayoko, O.B., Konrad, A.M. and Boyle, M.V. (2012), Online work: managing conflict and emotions for performance in virtual teams, European Management Journal, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 156-74.
Bain, P. and Mann, L. (1997), Project leadership in Australian R&D: perceptions of performance and effectiveness, paper presented at the Australian Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference, Melbourne. Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1173-82. Bass, B.M. and Steidlmeier, P. (1999), Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 181-217. Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., Jung, D.I. and Berson, Y. (2003), Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 207-18. Bell, B.S. and Kozlowski, S.W.J. (2002), A typology of virtual team: implications for effective leadership, Group & Organizational Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 14-49. Bell, C. and Song, F. (2005), Emotions in the conflict process: an application of the cognitive appraisal model of emotions to conflict management, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 30-54. Berlew, D.E. (1974), Leadership and organizational excitement, in Kolb, D.A., Rubin, I.M. and Mc Intyre, J. (Eds), Organizational Psychology: A Book of Readings, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 265-77. Bliese, P.D. (2000), Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: implications for data aggregation and analysis, in Klein, K. and Kozlowski, S.W. (Eds), Multilevel Theory, Research and Methods in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 349-81. Bodtker, A.M. and Jameson, J.K. (2001), Emotion in conflict formation and its transformation: application to organizational conflict management, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 259-75. Brehmer, B. (1976), Social judgement theory and the analysis of interpersonal conflict, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 83 No. 6, pp. 985-1003. Brett, J.M. and Rognes, J.K. (1986), Intergroup relations in organizations, in Goodman, P. (Ed.), Designing Effective Work Groups, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 167-89. Brockner, J. and Higgins, E.T. (2001), Regulatory focus theory: implications for the study of emotions at work, Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, Vol. 86 No. 1, pp. 35-66. Brodbeck, F.C, Frese, M., Akerblom, S., Audia, G., Bakacsi, G., Bendova, H., Bodega, B., Bodur, M., Booth, S., Brenk, K., Castel, P., Den Hartog, D., Donnelly-Cox, G., Gratchev, M.V., Holmberg, I., Jarmuz, S., Jesuino, J.C., Jorbenadse, R., Kabasakal, H.E., Keating, M., Kipiani, G., Konrad, E., Koopman, P., Kurc, A., Leeds, C., Lindell, M., Maczynski, J., Martin, J.S., OConnell, J., Papalexandris, A., Papalexandris, N., Prieto, J.M., Rakitski, B., Reber, G., Sabadin, A., Schramm-Nielsen, J., Schultz, M., Sigfrids, C., Szabo, E., Thierry, H., Vondrysova, M., Weibler, J., Wilderom, C., Witkowski, S. and Wunderer, S. (2000), Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 73, pp. 1-29. Burns, R.B. and Burns, R.A. (2008), Business Research Methods and Statistics Using SPSS, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Cady, S. and Valentine, H.J. (1999), Team innovation and perceptions of consideration: what difference does diversity make?, Small Group Research, Vol. 30, pp. 730-50. Chang, C.-H.D. and Lyons, B.J. (2012), Not all aggressions are created equal: a multifoci approach to workplace aggression, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 79-92. Chatman, J.A. and Flynn, F.J. (2001), The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 956-74.
EDI 31,8
718
Chen, C.C. and Van Velsor, E. (1996), New directions for research and practice in diversity leadership, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 285-302. Cherulnik, P.D., Donley, K.A., Wiewel, T.S.R. and Miller, S.R. (2001), Charisma is contagious: the effect of leaders charisma on obeservers affect, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 2149-59. Coakes, S.J. and Steed, L.G. (2001), SPSS: Analysis Without Anguish: Version 10.0, John Wiley and Sons, Brisbane. Cohen, A., Doveh, E. and Eick, U. (2001), Statistical properties of the rWG(J) index of agreement, Psychological Methods, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 297-310. Cox, T. Jr (1993), Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory, Research and Practices, BerrettKoehler, San Francisco, CA. Cunningham, G.B. and Sagas, M. (2004), Group diversity, occupational commitment, occupational turnover intention among NCAA division IA football coaching staff, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 236-54. DeChurch, L.A. and Marks, M.A. (2001), Maximizing the benefits of task conflict: the role of conflict management, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 4-22. De Dreu, C.K.W. (2006), When too little or too much hurts: evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams, Journal of Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 83-107. De Dreu, C.K.W. and Weingart, L.R. (2003), Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 4, pp. 741-9. De Dreu, C.K.W., Evers, A., Beersma, B., Kluwer, E.S. and Nauta, A. (2001), A theory-based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 645-68. de Wit, F.R.C., Greer, L.L. and Jehn, K.A. (2011), The paradox of intragroup conflict: a metaanalysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 97 No. 2, pp. 360-90. DiTomaso, N. and Hooijberg, R. (1996), Diversity and the demands of leadership, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 163-87. Edmonson, A.C. (2003), Speaking up in the operating room: how team leders promote lerning in interdisciplinary action teams, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 1419-52. Euwema, M.C., Van de Vliert, E. and Bakker, A.B. (2003), Substantive and relational effectiveness of organizational conflict behavior, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 119-39. Firestein, R.L. and McCowan, R.J. (1988), Creative problem solving and communication behviours in small groups, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 106-20. George, J.M. (2000), Emotions and leadership: the role of emotional intelligence, Human Relations, Vol. 53 No. 8, pp. 1027-55. Gibson, C.B. and Vermeulen, F. (2003), A healthy divide: subgroups as a stimulus for team learning behavior, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 202-39. Giebels, E. and Janssen, O. (2005), Conflict stress and reduced well-being at work: the buffering effect of third-party help, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 137-55. Glick, W.H. (1985), Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: pitfalls in multilevel research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 601-16. Graham, J.L., Kim, D.K., Lin, C. and Robinson, M. (1988), Buyer-seller negotiations around the Pacific rim: differences in fundamental exchange processes, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 48-54.
Greer, L.L., Jehn, K.A. and Mannix, E.A. (2008), Conflict transformation: an exploration of the inter relationships between task, relationship and process conflict, Small Group Research, Vol. 39 No. 8, pp. 278-302. Griffin, M.A., Hart, P.M. and Wilson-Evered, E. (2000), Using employee opinion surveys to improve organizational health, in Murphy, L.R. and Cooper, C.L. (Eds), Health and Productive Work: An International Perspective. Harrison, D.A., Price, K.H. and Bell, M.P. (1998), Beyond relational demography: time and effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 96-107. Harrison, D.A, Price, K.H., Gavin, J.A. and Florey, A.T. (2002), Time, teams, and task performance: changing effects of surface and deep-level diversity on group functioning, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 1029-45. Hart, P.M., Griffin, M.A., Wearing, A. and Cooper, J. (1996), Queensland Public Agency Staff Survey (QPASS) Manual, Public Industrial and Employee Relations, Queensland, Brisbane. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. and Raspson, R. (1994), Emotional Cognition, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. Iverson, R.D. and Zatzick, C.D. (2011), The effects of downzing on labor productivity: the value of showing consideration for employees morale and welfare in hihg performance work systems, Human Resource Management, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 29-44. Jackson, S.E. and Joshi, A. (2010), Work team diversity, in Zedeck, S. (Ed.), APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 2 American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. Jackson, S.E., Joshi, A. and Erhardt, N.L. (2003), Recent research on team and organizational diversity: SWOT analysis and implications, Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 801-39. Jehn, K.A. (1995), A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 256-82. Jehn, K.A. (1997), A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 530-57. Jehn, K.A. and Chatman, J.A. (2000), The influence of proportional and perceptual conflict composition on team performance, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 56-73. Jehn, K.A. and Mannix, E.A. (2001), The dynamic nature of conflict: a longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 238-51. Jehn, K.A., Chadwick, C. and Thatcher, S.M.B. (1997), To agree or not to agree: diversity, conflict, and group outcomes, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 287-306. Jehn, K.A., Northcraft, G.B. and Neale, M.A. (1999), Why differences make a difference: a field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 741-63. rtel, C.E.J. and Hooper, G.S. (2002), Workgroup emotional Jordan, P.J., Ashkanasy, N.M., Ha intelligence: scale development and relationship to team process effectiveness and goal focus, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 195-214. Joshi, A., Liao, H. and Roh, H. (2011), Bridging domains in workplace demography research: a review and reconceptualization, Journal of Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 521-52. Julian, C.C., Wachter, R.M. and Mueller, C.B. (2009), International joint venture top management teams: does heterogeneity make a difference?, Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 107-29.
EDI 31,8
720
Kamil, K.M. (1997), Culture and conflict management: a theoretical framework, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 338-60. Kanter, R.M. (1977), Men and Women of the Corporation, Basic Books, New York, NY. Kearney, E. and Gebert, D. (2009), Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the promise of transformational leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 77-89. Kelly, J.R. and Barsade, S.G. (2001), Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams, Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, Vol. 86 No. 1, pp. 99-130. Kirkbride, P.S., Tang, S.F.Y. and Westwood, R.I. (1991), Chinese conflict preferences and negotiating behaviour: cultural and psychological influences, Organization Studies, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 365-86. Kochan, T.A., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S.E., Joshi, A., Jehn, K.E., Leonard, D., Levine, D. and Thomas, D. (2003), The effects of diversity on business performance: report of the diversity research network, Human Resource Management, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 3-21. Kormanski, C. (1982), Leadership strategies for managing conflict, The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 112-8. Kotlyar, I. and Karakowsky, L. (2007), Falling over ourselves to follow the leader: conceptualizing connections between transformational leader behaviors and dysfunctional team conflict, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 38-49. Kozlowski, S.W.J., Gully, S.M., Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J.A. (1996), Team leadership and development: theoies, principles and guidelines for trainng leaders and teams, in Beyerlein, M.M., Johnson, D.A. and Beyerlein, S.T. (Eds), Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, JAI, Greenwich, CT, pp. 253-91. Leung, A.K., Maddux, W.W., Galinsky, A.D. and Chiu, C. (2008), Multicultural experience enhances creativity, American Psychologist, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 169-81. Locke, E.A. (1976), The nature and causes of job satisfaction, in Dunnette, M. (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Prentice Hall, Chicago, IL, pp. 1297-350. Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D.L. and Weingart, L.R. (2001), Maximizing cross-functional new product teams innovativeness and constraint adherence: a conflict communication perspective, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 779-83. Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996), Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the MLQ literature, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 385-425. McGraw, K.O. and Wong, S.P. (1996), Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients, Psychological Methods, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 30-46. MacKinnon, D.P. and Dwyer, J.H. (1993), Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies, Evaluation Review, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 144-58. MacKinnon, D.P., Warsi, G. and Dwyer, J.H. (1995), A simulation study of mediated effect measures, Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 41-62. Mannix, E.A. and Neale, M.A. (2005), What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 31-55. Martin, L., Milliken, F., Wiesenfeld, B. and Salgado, S. (2003), Racioethnic diversity and group members experiences: the role of the racioethnic diversity of organizational context, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 75-106. Marmenout, K. (2011), Peer interaction in mergers: evidence of collective rumination, Human Resource Management, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 783-808.
Meeus, J., Duriez, B., Vanbeselaere, N. and Boaen, F. (2010), The role of national identity representation in the relation between in-group identification and out-group derogation: ethnic versus civic representation, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 305-20. Miller, R., Griffin, M.A. and Hart, P.M. (1999), Personality and organizational health: the role of conscientiousness, Work and Stress, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 7-19. Milliken, F.J. and Martins, L.L. (1996), Searching for common threads: understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 402-33. Mohammed, S. and Angell, L.C. (2004), Surface- and deep-level diversity in workgroups examining the moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 1015-39. Montoya-Weiss, M.M., Massey, A.P. and Song, M. (2001), Getting it together: temporal coordination and conflict management in virtual teams, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 1251-62. Motowidlo, S.J. and Borman, W.C. (1978), Relationships between military morale, motivation, satisfaction, and unit effectiveness, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 47-52. Neal, A., Griffin, M.A. and Hart, P.M. (2000), The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior, Safety Science, Vol. 34 Nos 1-3, pp. 99-109. Nemeth, C.J. (1986), Differential contributions of majority and minority influence, Psychological Review, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 23-32. Nemeth, C.J. (1992), Minority dissent as a stimulant to group performance, in Worchel, S., Wood, W. and Simpson, J.A. (Eds), Group Process and Productivity, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 95-111. Nishii, L.H. and Mayer, D.M. (2009), Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups? The moderating role of leader-member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 6, pp. 1412-26. Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw Hill, Sydney. Ohbuchi, K. and Takahashi, Y. (1994), Cultural styles of conflict management in Japanese and Americans: passivity, covertness, and effectiveness of strategies, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 1345-66. Olson, B.J., Parayitam, S. and Bao, Y. (2007), Strategic decision making: the effects of cognitive diversity, conflict and trust on decision outcomes, Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 196-222. Ospina, S. and Foldy, E. (2009), A critical review of race and ethnicity in the leadership literature: surfacing context, power and the collective dimensions of leadership, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 876-96. Pane Haden, S. and Cooke, J. (2012), Is morale irrelevant?, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 532, p. 96. Pelled, L.H. (1996), Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: an intervening process theory, Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 615-31. Pelled, L.H., Eisenhardt, K.M. and Xin, K.R. (1999), Exploring the black box: an analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 1-28. : relational demography and Pelled, L.H., Xin, K.R. and Weiss, A.M. (2001), No es como m conflict in a Mexican production facility, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 1, pp. 63-84. Pescosolido, A. (2002), Emergent leaders as managers of group emotion, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 583-99.
EDI 31,8
722
Peterson, P., Park, N., Hall, N. and Seligman, M.E.P. (2009), Zest at work, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 161-72. Phillips, K.W. and Lloyd, D.L. (2006), When surface and deep-level diversity collide: the effects on dissenting group members, Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, Vol. 99 No. 2, pp. 143-60. rtel, C.E.J., Mann, L. and Hirst, G. (2002), How leaders influence the impact of Pirola-Merlo, A., Ha affective events on team climate and performance in R&D teams, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 561-81. Plutchick, R. (1987), Evolutionary bases of empathy, in Eisenberg, N. and Strayer, J. (Eds), Empathy and its Development, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 38-46. Prati, L.M., Douglas, C., Ferris, G.R., Ammeter, A.P. and Buckley, M.R. (2003), Emotional intelligence, leadership effectiveness and team outcomes, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 21-40. Preacher, K.J., Rucker, D.D. and Hayes, A.F. (2007), Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: theory, methods, and prescriptions, Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 185-227. Proudford, K.L. and Nkomo, S. (2006), Race and ethnicity in organizations, in Konrad, A.M. Prasad, P. and Pringle, J.K. (Eds), Handbook of Workplace Diversity, Sage, London, pp. 323-44. Rahim, M.A. (1983), A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 368-76. Rapisarda, B.A. (2002), The impact of motional intelligence on work team cohesion and performance, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 363-79. Riordan, C.M. (2001), Relational demography within groups: past developments, contradictions and newdireactions, Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol. 19, pp. 131-73. Rosenbaum, L.L. and Rosenbaum, W.B. (1971), Morale and productivity f group leadership style, stress and type of task, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 343-8. Salovey, P. and Mayer, J. (1990), Emotional intelligence, Imagination, Cognition & Personality, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 185-211. Sekaquaptewa, D. and Thompson, M. (2002), The differential effects of solo status on members of high and low status groups, Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 694-707. Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E. and Popper, M. (1998), Correlates of charismatic leader behavior in military units: subordinates attitudes, unit characteristics and superiors appraisal of leader performance, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 387-38. Simons, T. and Peterson, R. (2000), Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: the pivotal role of intragroup trust, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 102-11. Somech, A., Syna DeSivilya, H. and Lidogoster, H. (2009), Team conflict management and team effectiveness: the effects of task interdependence and team identification, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 359-78. rkman, I., Farndale, E., Morris, S.S., Paauwe, J., Stiles, P., Trevor, J. and Wright, P. Stahl, G.K., Bjo (2012), Six principles of effective global talent management, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 25-32. Stewart, M.M. and Johnson, O.E. (2009), Leader-member exchange as a moderator of the relationship between work group diversity and team performance, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 507-35.
Stout, R.J., Salas, E. and Fowlkes, J.E (1997), Enhancing team work in complex environment through team training, Groups Dynamics, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 169-82. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fiddel, L.S. (1996), Using Multivariate Statistics, 3rd ed., HarperCollins, New York, NY. Tang, S.F.Y. and Kirkbride, P.S. (1986), Developing conflict management skills in Hong Kong: an analysis of some cross-cultural implications, Management Learning, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 287-301. Tekleab, A.G., Quigley, N.R. and Tesluk, P.E. (2009), A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 170-205. Thompson, M. and Sekaquaptewa, D. (2002), When being different is detrimental: solo status and the performance of women and racial minorities, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 183-203. Tjosvold, D. (1998), Cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: accomplishments and challenges, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 285-342. Tjosvold, D. and Su, F. (2007), Managing anger and annoyance in organizations in china: the role of constructive controversy, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 260-89. Tjosvold, D., Poon, M. and Yu, Z. Y. (2005), Team effectiveness in China: cooperative conflict for relationship building, Human Relations, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 341-67. Triandis, H.C. (1994), Culture and Social Behavior, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Tse, D.K., Francis, J. and Walls, J. (1994), Cultural differences in conducting intra- and intercultural negotiations: a sino-Canadian comparison, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 537-55. Van de Vliert, E. and De Dreu, C.K.W. (1994), Optimizing performance by stimulating conflict, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 211-22. Van de Vliert, E. and Kabanoff, B. (1990), Toward theory-based measures of conflict management, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 199-209. Van de Vliert, E., Nauta, A., Giebels, E. and Janssen, O. (1999), Constructive conflict at work, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 475-91. van Knippenberg, D. and Schippers, M.C. (2007), Workgroup diversity, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 58, pp. 515-56. van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C.K.W. and Homan, A.C. (2004), Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 6, pp. 1008-22. Van Rooy, D.L. and Viswesvaran, C. (2003), Emotional intelligence: a meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 71-95. Von Glinow, M.A., Shapiro, D.L. and Brett, J.M. (2004), Can we talk and should we? Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 578-92. Walumbwa, F.O., Luthans, F., Ivery, J.B. and Oke, A. (2011), Authentically leading groups: the mediating role of collective psychological capital and trust, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 4-24. Weider-Hatfield, D. and Hatfield, J.D. (1996), Superiors conflict management strategies and subordinate outcomes, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 189-208. Williams, K.Y. and OReilly, C.A. (1998), Demography and diversity in organizations, in Staw, B.M. and Sutton, R.M. (Eds), Research in Organization Behavior, Jai Press, pp. 77-140.
EDI 31,8
724
Wege, W.J. and Moeller, A.T. (1995), Effectiveness of a problem-solving trainign program, Psychological Report, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 507-14. Xie, J., Song, M. and Stringfellow, A. (1998), Interfunctional conflict, conflict resolution styles, and new product success: a four-culture comparison, Management Science, Vol. 44 No. 12, pp. 192-206. Yang, J. and Mossholder, K.W. (2004), Decoupling task and relationship conflict: the role of intragroup emotional processing, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 589-605. Yang, Y. and Konrad, A.M. (2011), Diversity and organizational innovation: the role of employee involvement, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp. 1062-83. Zaccaro, S.J. and Klimoski, R. (2002), The Interface of Leadership and team processes, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 4-13. Zaccaro, S.J., Rittman, A.L. and Marks, M.A. (2001), Team leadership, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 451-83. Further reading Bond, C.F. Jr and DePaulo, B.M. (2006), Accuracy of deception judgments, Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 214-34. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Heider, F. (1946), Attitudes and cognitive organization, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 107-12. Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (2004), Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic test of their relative validity, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp. 755-68. Song, M., Dyer, B. and Thieme, R.J. (2006), Conflict management and innovation performance: an integrated contingency perspective, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 341-56. About the authors Oluremi B. Ayoko is a Senior Lecturer in Management at the University of Queensland Business School. She teaches conflict management, leading and managing people, human resource management and business research methods. Her research interests include conflict, emotions, leadership, employee territorial behaviors and workplace diversity. She has published in journals such as Applied Psychology: An International Review, International Journal of Conflict Management, International Journal of Organizational Analysis and Small Group Research. Oluremi B. Ayoko is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: r.ayoko@business.uq.edu.au Alison M. Konrad is a Professor of Organizational Behavior at the Richard Ivey School of Business and holder of the Corus Entertainment Chair in Women in Management. She earned her PhD in Applied Social Psychology at the Claremont Graduate University. She is a Fellow of the Eastern Academy of Management and a member of the Womens Executive Network (WXN) Advisory Board for Canadas Most Powerful Women Top 100. Her research interests center on gender and diversity in organizations.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Leaders Transformational Conflict and Emotion Management Behaviors in Culturally Diverse Workgroups

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Leaders Transformational Conflict and Emotion Management Behaviors in Culturally Diverse Workgroups

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.

Leaders management behaviors 695

Leaders management behaviors 697

Diversity Racioethnic diversity

Group/team processes Task conflict Relationship conflict

Outcomes Performance morale

Leader behaviors Conflict management Emotion management Transformational leadership

Figure 1. Leadership as a moderator of the diversity-conflictperformance relationship

Leaders management behaviors 699

Leaders management behaviors 701

Leaders management behaviors 703

Leaders management behaviors 705

1 1.00 0.14 0.13 0.04 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.12

Table I. Means, SDs, and correlations

Model 1 b step Final b

Task conflict Model 2 b step Final b Model 3 b step Final b

Notes: Number of groups 87. ***po0.10; *p o0.05; **po0.01, two-tailed tests

Leaders management behaviors 707

Table II. Regressions predicting conflict reported by group members

Notes: Number of groups 84. ***po0.10; *po0.05; **po0.01, two-tailed tests

0.25* 0.49 0.05* 0.55 0.55 0.01 0.11***

Notes: Number of groups 86. ***po0.10; *po0.05, two-tailed tests

Table IV. Regressions predicting group morale as reported by group members

Leaders management behaviors 709

3.9 3.8 3.7 Performance 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3

Leaders management behaviors 711

Leaders management behaviors 713

Leaders management behaviors 715

Leaders management behaviors 717

Leaders management behaviors 719

Leaders management behaviors 721

Leaders management behaviors 723

Você também pode gostar