ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research
© Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing association
Research Article
ISSN 2229 – 3795
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz1, Fatima A. Junaid2
1- MS Scholar, Institute of Management Sciences (IMSciences), Peshawar, Pakistan,
2- Assistant Professor, Institute of Management Sciences (IMSciences), Peshawar, Pakistan
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Workplace conflict is an inevitable phenomenon of organizational life. This study critically
analyzed the types and sources of conflict at four levels: intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup, and intergroup; with relation to different organizational phenomena. Costs of the
conflict to all parties (employee, organization and customers) in qualitative and qualitative
terms are analyzed. The consequences of conflict are also summarized. It was concluded that
conflict should be studied using more content rich and diversified methods like in-depth
interviews, case studies (phenomenological studies), focused group discussions and through
longitudinal studies as survey based studies are not sufficient to get the holistic picture of
workplace conflict. Future directions are also discussed.
Keywords: Conflict, Interpersonal Conflict, Conflict Sources, Conflict Costs
1. Introduction
Workplace conflict is an omnipresent organizational phenomenon. It is a major theme of
occupational/ social psychology and organizational behavior (De Dreu, 2008). A group of
organizational researchers (for example Watson & Haffman, 1996; Wall & Callister, 1995;
Thomas & Schmidt, 1976; Rizzo, House & Lirtzman, 1970) opined that conflict is terrible,
damaging and destructive to organization and to employees as well. It plunders the quality of
group decision making; reduces creativity and innovation, mess up team success, reduces
trust among employees (Jehn, 1994, 1995; & Amason, 1996). It was tagged as disturbing
force (Waltson, 1969). Therefore, in their opinion, conflict should be eradicated. The other
group of researchers (for review Tjosvold, 1998) argued that conflict may be constructive and
beneficial. It can contribute significantly to organization efficiency (Tjosvold, 1986a, 1986b,
2003; & De Deru & Van de Veliert, 2001). Harmonious, peaceful, cooperative groups are
prone to become static, indifferent and non-responsive to changes, creativity and innovation
(De Deru & Van de Veliert, 2001). Riaz & Junaid (Forthcoming) concluded that workplace
conflict is neither all together bad nor beneficial rather its nature, parties involved,
circumstances, and other related variables decide that either it is productive or
counterproductive.
This study, tried to summarize and discuss the types, causes, costs and consequences of
workplace conflict analytically.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
600
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
1.1 Workplace Conflict
There is no one agreed upon definition of workplace conflict as there are conflicts about the
definition of conflict (Tjosvold, 2008). According to Pondy (1967) conflict emerges when
one party perceives that its goals, values or views are being indulged by inter-reliant
counterparts (Wall & Callister, 1995; Thomas, 1992). While others (De Deru & Gelfand,
2007; Deutch, 1973;& Kelley & Thibaut, 1969) opined that workplace conflict may arise
because of scare resources (for example time, status, budgets), values (such as political
preferences, beliefs, religion, moral, social values), personality differences, misinterpreted
facts, perceptions, world views and may be due any combination of these.
According to Rahim (2010), workplace conflict can be categorized on many bases; hence
there are many types of it.
1.2 Affective Conflict
When two entities - individual, groups, organizations - while trying to solve a problem
together, become aware that their feelings and emotions are incompatible (Guetzkow & Gyr,
1954; & Amason, 1996). It was also named as relationship conflict (Jehn, 1997a), and as
emotional conflict (Pelled, Eisenhardt, & Xin, 1999; & Schermerhorn, Hung, & Obsborn,
2002). Pelled et al. (1999) defined this as “a situation in which group members have
interpersonal clashes characterized by anger, frustration and other negative feelings”. While
according to Schermerhorn et al (2002) “ it involves interpersonal difficulties that arises over
feeling of anger, mistrust, dislike, fear, resentment and the like”.
This type of conflict is negatively associated with affective reactions, and has a positive
relation with turn over intentions. It decreases employees’ satisfaction and psychological
well-being (Medina, Munduate, Dorado, Martinez, & Guerra, 2005).
1.3 Substantive Conflict
This type of conflict emerges when organizational members disagree on their tasks or job
content issues (Guetzkow & Gyr, 1954). It was also called as task conflict (Jehn, 1997; Pelled
et al., 1999) and as cognitive conflict (Amason, 1996). Pelled et al. (1999) define is as “a
situation in which group members disagree about task issues; like goals, key decision areas,
procedures and the appropriate choice for actions”. According to Jehn (1997b) task conflict is
a disagreement among group members’ ideas and opinions about the course of action to be
chosen for the specific task.
Affective conflict arises due to incongruence of feelings and/ or emotions while substantive
conflict is connected with incompatibilities in job duties and responsibilities of the conflicting
parties.
Along with theses two main type of conflict there are many other types of workplace conflict.
Like conflict of interest. It is a conflict in which each of the parties, sharing same
understanding of the circumstances, prefers a different rather incompatible solution to a
problem (Rahim, 2001). While according to Zechmeister and Druckman (1973), the conflict
in which parties perceives themselves as representative of their groups (in-groups); fighting
for group not for the self; are likely to be more harmful and pitiless than those who are
fighting for personal gains. Another type is conflict of values - when two social entities differ
in their values or ideologies on certain issues; it results in conflict of values (Druckman,
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
601
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
Broome & Korper, 1998). While in role conflict, a role occupant is required to perform two
or more roles that are in-congruent, opposing or even mutually exclusive activities (Rahim,
2010). According to Pandey and Kurmar (1997), “it is a state of mind or experience or
perception of the role incumbent arising out of the simultaneous occurrence of two or more
role expectations such that compliance with one would make compliance with other(s) more
difficult or even impossible”.
2. Sources of Workplace Conflict
As there are four level of analysis of conflict (Rahim, 2010): intrapersonal, interpersonal,
intragroup and intergroup. So sources are of four types as well.
3.1
Sources of Intra-personal and Role Conflicts
Sources of intra-personal conflicts are mainly hierarchical and structural (Rahim, 2010). Two
main sources are mal-assignment, goal in-congruence, and inappropriate demand on capacity.
Mal-assignment means when an employee is assigned a task for which he does not have the
appropriate expertise, aptitude and commitment; the person may experience qualitative role
overload which results to the role conflict (Argyris, 1973). While inappropriate demand on
capacity means that an employee can not properly satisfy all the demands of his position even
by working at the maximum capacity, this lead to quantitative role overload (Rahim, 2010; &
Argyris, 1973) or his / her capacity (skills, aptitude, and commitment) exceeds position
demands, he find the position non-challenging. Inadequate role demand and under load role is
a common problem of young graduates. They often find their jobs not as challenging as they
were told (Newton & Keenan, 1987).
Personality is studied in relation to conflict in several ways. McAdams (1996) argues that
individual differences in personality can be described at three levels: what a person has (traits
of a person labeled as level –I), what a person does (contextually influenced strategies, goals,
and concerns – level II), and how the person makes his or her experiences (life narratives –
level III). In these three levels of differences, certain traits (level I) are related to conflict
specific motives while certain behaviors (level II) are related with conflict. Like
agreeableness is associated with motives to maintain harmonious social relationship, which
influence conflict related behaviors (Jansen-Campbell & Graziano, 2001).
The structure of an organization has a major influence on role conflict. Organization
generates a high degree of role conflict by creating conflicting goals, policies, and decisions
(Rahim, 2010). Analysis of structural variables such as formalization, supervisory span, work
group size, span of subordination, functional interdependence and participation represents
significant basis of influence on the both, role conflict and role ambiguity (Morris, Streers &
Koch, 1979; & Rizzo, House, & Lirtzman, 1970). Management style may also generate role
conflict. According to Rizzo et al.(1970), role conflict and vagueness tend to be lower under
conditions in which superiors are more frequently engaging in emphasizing production under
conditions of uncertainty, providing structure and standards, facilitating teamwork, tolerating
freedom, and exerting upward influence”. Formalization, supervisory supportiveness, and
team orientation are negatively related to role conflict (House & Rizzo, 1972).
2.1 Sources of Interpersonal Conflict
Conflict threatens one’s self esteem and impacts negatively all physiological systems in ways
like accelerated hear beat and increased muscle tensions (McEwen, 1998). According to De
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
602
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
Deru, Dierendonck and Dijikstra (2004), “stress at workplace is seen as an antecedent to
interpersonal conflict, affecting well-being negatively and employees with low well-being
may trigger conflict with colleagues who are more prone for such conflict due to poor
performance”. According to Khan and Haque (2009), interpersonal conflict with colleagues is
significantly related to personal outcomes (self esteem, general well being, emotional
exhaustion), while interpersonal conflicts with superiors is significantly related to
organizational outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover
intentions and real turnover. According to social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), self
categorization theory (Tajfel, 1981), and similarity – attractiveness prospective (Byrne, 1971)
interpersonal conflicts arises from social identity issues like prejudice towards out group,
feeling of superiority, hidden inclination of serving in-group at the expense of out group(s)
(De Dreu and Gelfand, 2008). According to Spector's (1998) emotion – centered model of
job stress, actual conflict which may be caused by many factors, which may results in
perceived interpersonal conflict or vice versa. Job stressors bring out emotional reactions and
subsequent strains which lead to perceived interpersonal conflict or actual conflict.
Figure 1: Emotion Centered Model of Job Stress (Adopted from Spector, 1998)
2.2 Sources of Intragroup Conflict
Different types of conflict emerge at different stages of group work (Jehn & Mannix, 2001).
Leadership style can virtually influence all conflict generating variables in an group (Rahim,
2010). There are three situations regarding leaders and subordinates in a group/ organization.
In first, leader treats group members differently. The aggrieved member may be in conflict
with favored members. In second situation group members unit against its leader: May be
because he changes jobs descriptions, schedules, rules and regulation; remove some
incentives; and /or impose some sanctions. Members may perceive these actions unfair and/
or biased; and may resist to these changes which may generate conflicts. In the third
situation, members form sub groups. Difference on postings, in group – out group bias,
differences in opinions of the sub groups may lead to intra group conflicts (Maier & Verser,
1982).
Task structure represents the extent to which the task is simple/ routine or complex/ non
routine (Jehn et al., 1999). According to Jehn et al (1999) and Pelled et al (1999), task
structure leads to task conflict which is positively related to performance. If groups are
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
603
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
performing routine task then performance may be affected negatively and in case of non –
routine and complex task the performance will be improved.
When group are composed of individuals with diverse interpersonal communication styles,
attitudes, values, and interests; then there are greater possibilities that its members will have
opposing perspective toward group and organizational goals (Rahim, 2010). According to an
empirical study of Rahim (1979), intragroup conflict is significantly less in homogenous
groups than heterogeneous groups. The increasing trend of having female; followers of
different religions; people of different ethnic background, different educational background,
age groups (generations); and the move from formal hierarchal organization to self managing
team based organizations, prompt the researchers and management to consider diversity of
the workforce because it may results in generation of conflict (Mohammad & Angell, 2004;
Heneman, Judge & Heneman, 1999; & Lawler, Mohrman & Ledford, 1995). A classical,
functional organization cannot cope with changing corporate world complex problems; which
lead organizations towards project teams, matrix structure and cross functional teams and
these ways of organizing involved hiring of people with different ethnic, social and
information backgrounds (Janssens & Steyaert, 2003; & Jehn, Northcraft, & Neale, 1999).
However, these teams have their own internal problems (Jehn, 1995). Because of theses
problems, there are chances of intra-group conflicts.
2.3 Sources of Intergroup Conflict
The sources of intergroup conflicts are structural in nature mostly, such as organizational
hierarchy, span of control, and centralization of power (Bornstein, 2003). Complex
organization used to develop differentiated systems to accomplish overall organizational
objectives. Differentiated sub systems develop distinct functions, objectives, and norms.
These sub systems compete with one another for resources, power, and status (Bornstein,
2003; & Lawerance & Lorsch, 1967a). According to Lawerance and Lorsch (1967b) that
subsystems develop different types of internal structures (the formality of structures and time,
goal, and interpersonal orientation) to respond their relevant sub environment. This
heterogeneity leads to inter departmental conflict (Lawerance & Lorsch, 1967a).
Figure 2: Intergroup Conflict Model (Adopted from Walton and Dutton, 1969)
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
604
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
According to Spender and Kessler (1995), there are three categories of interdependences
namely: (1) pooled interdependence - where groups are relatively independent of each other,
but continue to work for the attainment of organization’s goal, (2) sequential
interdependence – where the output of one unit becomes the input of another unit in line, and
(3) reciprocal interdependence – where the outputs of one group become the input of other
groups, in any direction. Sequential and reciprocal interdependences are the major sources of
inter group conflict. Potentials for intergroup conflict exist when two units (groups or
departments) depend upon a common pool of scare organizational resources such as physical
space, equipment, manpower, operating funds, capital funds, central staff resources, and
centralized services (Walton & Dutton, 1969).
From the discussion it could be inferred that conflict typology is a multivariate, having
different bases like personality and the roles of conflicting parties; job duties, responsibilities,
communication and reporting lines; real or perceived disagreements, discomforts; interests
and many other variables. But irrespective of its source and type, organization has to make
use of conflict.
3. Costs of Conflict at Workplace
Unresolved conflict generates many serious consequences involving high financial and
human costs. Conflict may lead to frustration, tension, low morale, missing meeting deadlines,
lack of self confidence, low trust level, communication problems, absenteeism, and legal
proceedings (Buss, 2009). According to Levine (1998), costs of conflict comprises of: Direct
cost – fees of layers and other professionals; productivity cost – value of lost time /
opportunity cost; continuity cost – loss of ongoing relationship; and emotional cost – the pain
of being held by emotions. Dana (2001) identified eight hidden costs of conflict: wastage of
time, bad quality of decisions made, loss of skilled employees, restructuring inefficiencies,
lowered job motivation, disruption, absenteeism, and health costs (Riaz, 2010).
Buss (2009, p.21) divided cost of conflict at workplace in three categories: cost to
organization, cost to employees, and cost to clients.
3.1 Cost of Conflict to the Organization
Mismanaged conflict affects productivity (Cram & MacWilliams, 2009). Different studies
mentioned different proportion of time wasted in managing conflicts e.g. up to 20 percent
(Thomas & Scmidt, 1976); 42 percent (Watson & Hoffman, 1996). While according to a
large study of 5000 employees in European and North American countries, carried out by
OPP ( an international psychology consultants in collaboration with UK based The Charter
Institute of Personnel & Development (CPID), work time wasted in dealing poorly managed
conflicts ranges from 0.9 hours to 3.3 hours per week (CIPD, 2008 as cited in Riaz, 2010).
Mishandled conflict affects employees’ health and wellbeing, which in turn results in
absenteeism. It is a habitual pattern of absence from duty or obligation (Johns, 2007). A high
correlation exists among absenteeism, job stress and needing a break from fighting with
colleagues (CFLSRI, 1998). Workplace conflict may also create a tendency of presenteeism.
It means showing up at work while ill or otherwise not completely fit for work. Due to
presenteeism productivity declines (Dana, 2001). Cost of absenteeism to organization is well
researched, occupational medicine begun to suggest that work lost due to presenteeism is
only the visible tip of an iceberg and that the hidden cost of presenteeism may be much
greater” (Buss, 2009).
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
605
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
Researchers, who studied exit interview data on voluntary turn over, reported that unresolved
conflict is a influential factor in at least 50 percent of all such departures and that, it costs
about 150 percent of one trained employee’s salary to replace him or her (Duxbury &
Higgins, 2003). While according to Dana (2001), conflict is the cause of 90 percent voluntary
departures. The amount of theft by employees and damage in a company has a positive
correlation with level of conflict in a company (Buss, 2009). Theft and damages costs 2
percent to a company of the staff total cost (Dana, 2001).
3.2 Cost of Conflict to the Employee
Mismanaged and unresolved conflict causes stress, reduces confidence levels, makes
employees anxious, and frustrated. All these lead to lesser job satisfaction, humiliation,
embarrassment, and stressed; these induce psychological and physical diseases. The
consequences of such happenings disturbed employee’s family and friend as well (McClure,
2000). The consequences of such happenings disturb employee’s family and friend as well
(Buss, 2009).
Employees involved in conflict, experience a break in their relations, and often feel alienated
from each other, become self centered. They adopt avoiding behaviors, and may harm each
other in many ways. Escalated conflict leads parties to shun contact, end communication,
withheld information or provide wrong information (Cram & McWilliams, 2009; Buss, 2009;
Hart, McDonald, & Rock, 2004 & CFLSRI, 1998). Presenteeism is also affecting employee
negatively as this may harm employee’s health, damage the quality of working life, and give
impression of uselessness at work (Buss, 2009).
3.3 Cost of Conflict to the Customers
Cost due to mishandled conflict to customer is not researched in depth. One among few
studies is of Buss (2009) which discussed it. According to him, workplace conflict affects the
quality of product or service. In hyper competitive industries, negative consequences of
conflict is considerable and it may tarnish the organization brand image and value positioning
in the mind of customers. Most of these costs are hidden and are very difficult to quantify.
However, there may be observable consequences like reduced motivation of staff leading to
lower quality products or service, or mistakes that can even threaten customer’s health and
hence results in legal suits and compensatory claims from customer (Buss, 2009; & Riaz,
2010).
3.4 Consequences of Conflict at Workplace
A number of studies have attempted to relate conflicts to personal and organizational
outcomes (Dana, 2001). Consequences of role conflict are low job satisfaction, low
confidence, low organizational commitment, lack of job involvement, tension and anxiety
plans to leave the job, and inability to influence decisions (Rizzo, House & Lirtzman, 1970;
Rahim, 2001; & Jackson & Schuler, 1985).
According to Jehn (1995), a moderate level of substantive conflict is functional, as it
encourages discussion and debate, which help groups to attain a higher level of performance.
According to Jehn et al. (1999) and Bourgeois (1985), this type of conflict may approve
group performance through better understanding of different point of views and alternative
solutions.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
606
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
Figure 3: Summary of Sources and Consequences of Workplace Conflict
4. Conclusion and Future Research Directions
From the discussion it can be concluded that conflict is an inevitable organizational
phenomenon. Its types, sources, costs and consequences are multi-dimensional. Therefore it
is suggested that conflict should be studied using more content rich and mixed methods (refer
to critical realistic approaches) like in-depth interviews, case studies (phenomenological
studies), and focused group discussions as well as through longitudinal studies. Because of
survey based studies are not sufficient to get the holistic picture of workplace conflict. Future
directions are also discussed.
5. References
1. Amason, A. C., (1996), Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional
conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams.
Academy of Management Journal, 39, pp 123-148.
2. Argyris, C., (1973), Personality and Organization Theory Revisited. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 18, pp 141-167.
3. Bandura, A., (1986), Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc.
4. Bornstein, G., (2003), Intergroup Conflict: Individual, Groups, and Collective
Interests. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, pp 129-145.
5. Buss, H., (2009), Measuring and Reducing The Cost of Conflict at Workplace in
UNHCR, Unpublished master dissertation, Institut Universitaire Kurt Bosch,
Switzerland.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
607
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
6. Byrne, D., (1971), The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
7. CFLSRI. (1998), Absenteeism: Workplace Health System. Canadian Fitness and Life
Style Research Institute.
8. Cram, J. A. & McWilliams, R. K., (2009), From Conflict to Opportunity: A Guide to
Understanding and Managing Workplace Conflict, Cramber River Consultant.
9. Dana, D., (2001), Conflict Resolution, New York: McGraw-Hill.
10. Dana, D., (2001), The Dana Measure of Financial Cost of Organizational Conflict,
New York: McGraw-Hill.
11. De Dreu, C. K. W. , Dierendonck, Maria D. & Dijkstra, T.M., (2004), "Conflict at
work and individual well-being", International Journal of Conflict Management,
15(1), pp 6 – 26.
12. De Dreu, C. K. W., (2008), The virtue and vice of workplace conflict: Food for
(pessimistic) thought. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, pp 5–18.
13. De Dreu, C. K. W. & Van De Vilert, E., (2001), Using Conflict in Organization,
London: Sage.
14. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Gelfand, M. J., (2007), Conflict in the workplace: Sources,
dynamics, and functions across multiple levels of analysis” In C. K.W. De Dreu, &
Gelfand, M.J., (Ed). The Psychology of Conflict and Conflict Management in
Organization, 3-54. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
15. Deutsch, M., (1973), The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive
Processes, New Haven: Yale University Press.
16. Druckman, D. , Broome, B.J. & Korper, S. H., (1988), Value differences and conflict
resolution: Facilitation or delinking? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32, pp 489-510.
17. Duxbury, L. & Higgins, C., (2003), Work Life Conflict in Canada in the New
Millennium - A Status Report. Healthy Community Division, Health Canada.
18. Guetzkow, H; Gyr, J., (1954), An analysis of conflict in decision-making groups.
Human Relations, 7, pp 367-382.
19. Heneman, H.G., Judge, T.A., & Heneman, R.L., (1999), Staffing Organizations.
Boston, MA: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
20. House, R. J. & Rizzo, J. R., (1972), Role Conflict and Ambiguity as Critical variables
in a model of Organization Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance,7, pp 467-505.
21. Janssens, M., & Steyaert, C., (2003), Theories of diversity within organization
studies: Debates and future trajectories. Paper presented at Economic Growth and
Innovation in Multicultural Environments (ENGIME) workshop.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
608
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
22. Jehn, K., (1994), Enhancing effectiveness: An Investigation of Advantages and
Disadvantages of Value-based Intragroup Conflict. International Journal of Conflict
Management, 5, pp 223–238.
23. Jehn, K., (1995), A Multi-method Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of
Intragroup Conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, pp 256–282.
24. Jehn, K., (1997a), A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions in
Organizational Groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, pp 530-557.
25. Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A., (2001), The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal
study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal,
44(2), pp 238–251.
26. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A., (1999), Why Differences makes a
Difference: A Field Study of Diversity, Conflict, and Performance in Workgroups.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, pp 741-763
27. Jehn, K.A., (1997b), To agree or not to agree: The effects of value congruence,
individual demographic dissimilarity, and conflict of workgroup outcomes.
International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, pp 287-305.
28. Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G., (2001), Agreeableness as a Moderator of
Interpersonal Conflict. Journal of Personality, 69, pp 323-362.
29. Johns, G., (2007), Absenteeism in Ritzer, G. (Ed). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of
Sociology, Blackwell Publishing.
30. Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W., (1969), Group problem solving. In G. Lindzey & E.
Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology. Vol. 4. Reading, Mass.:
Addison- Wesley.
31. Khan, A. M. Haque, A., (2009). Interpersonal Conflict with Colleagues and Superiors
and Its Differential Impact on Job Related Outcomes. The Journal of Humanities &
Social Sciences, 17, pp 80-95.
32. Lawer, E.E.III, Mohrmsn, S.A., & Ledford Jr., G.E., (1995). Creating high
performance organizations: Practices and results of employee involvement and total
quality management in Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsh, J.W., (1967a), Differentiation and Integration in Complex
Organization. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 12, pp 1- 47.
34. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsh, J.W., (1967b), Organization and Environment. IrwinDorsey: Homewood, IL.
35. Levine, S., (1998), The many Costs of Conflict, in S. Levine (Ed), Getting to
Resolution, San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.
36. Maier, N. R. F. & Verser, G.C., (1982), Psychology in Industrial Organization (5th
Ed), Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
609
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
37. McAdams, D. P., (1996), Personality, Modernity and Storied Self: A Contemporary
Framework for Studying Persons. Psychological Inquiry, 7, pp 295-321.
38. McEwen, B. S., (1998), Protective and Damaging Effects of Stress Mediators.
Seminar in Medicine of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 338, pp 171-179.
39. Medina, J. F., Munduate L., Dorado, A. M., Martinez, I., & Guerra, M. J., (2005),
Types of Intragroup conflict and affective reactions. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 20, pp 219-230.
40. Mohammad, S, & 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, 25, pp 1015-1039.
41. Morris, J. H., Steers, R.M., & Koch, J. L., (1979), Influence of Organization Structure
on Role Conflict and Ambiguity for three Occupational Grouping. The Academy of
Management Journal, 22, pp 58-71.
42. Newton, T. J., & Keenan, A., (1987), Role Stress Reexamined: An Investigation of
Role Stress Predictor. Organizational Behavior and Human Processes, 40, pp 346368.
43. Pandey, S., & Kumar, E. S., (1997), Development of a measure of role conflict.
International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, pp 187-215.
44. Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M. , & Xin K. R., (1999), Exploring the black box: An
analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Sciences
Quarterly, 44, pp 1-28.
45. Pondy, L., (1967), Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 17, pp 296– 320.
46. Rahim, M.A., (1979), The Management of Intra-organizational Conflict: A laboratory
Study with Organization Design. Management International Review, 19, pp 97-106.
47. Rahim, M.A., (2010), Managing Conflict in Organization (3rd ed) London: Quorum
Books.
48. Riaz, M. K., (2010), Workplace Conflict: An overview and analysis. Unpublished
MBA Dissertation, Institute of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan.
49. Riaz, M.K., & Junaid, F.A., (Forthcoming), Workplace Conflict: Constructive or
Destructive. African Journal of Business Management.
50. Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J. & Lirtzman, S.I., (1970), Role Conflict and Ambiguity in
Complex Organizations. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 15(2), pp 150-163.
51. Schermerhorn, R. J(Jr), Hunt G.,& Osborn., (2002), Organizational Behavior”, (7ed),
Wiley.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
610
Types, sources, costs and consequences of workplace conflict
Muhammad K. Riaz, Fatima A. Junaid
52. Spector, P. E., (1998), A control theory of the job stress process. In C. L. Cooper
(Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 153–169). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
53. Spender, J. C. & Kessler, E. H., (1995), Managing the Uncertainties of Innovation:
Extending Thompson (1967). Human Relations,48, pp 35-56.
54. Tajfel, H., (1981), Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
55. Thomas, K. W. & Schmidt, W. H., (1976), A Survey of Managerial Interests with
Respect to Conflict. The Academy of Management Journal, 19, pp 315-318.
56. Thomas, W.K., (1992), Conflict & Conflict Management: Reflections and Updates.
Journal of Organizational Behavior. 13, pp 265-274.
57. Tjosvold D., (1998), Comparative and Competitive goal approach to Conflict:
Accomplishments and Challenges. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47,
pp 285-342.
58. Tjosvold, D., (1986a), Dynamics of Interdependence, Human Relations, 39, pp 517540.
59. Tjosvold, D., (1986b), Working Together to get Things Done, Boston: Lexington.
60. Tjosvold, D., (2008), The Conflict-Positive Organization: It depends upon us. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 29, pp 19-28.
61. Wall, J., & Callister, R., (1995), Conflict and its management. Journal of
Management, 21, pp 515-558.
62. Walton R. E. & Dutton J. M., (1969), The Management of Interdepartmental Conflict:
A model and Review. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14(1), pp 73-84.
63. Walton, R. (1969). Managing Conflict, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
64. Watson, C. & Hoffman, L. R., (1996), Managers as Negotiators: A Test of Power
versus Gender as Predictor of Feelings, behavior and Outcomes. The Leadership
Quarterly, 7(1), pp 63-85.
65. Zechmeister, K. & Druckman, D., (1973), Determinants of resolving a conflict of
interest: A simulation of political decision-making. The Journal of Conflict Resolution,
17, pp 63-88.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2011
611