Is cooperation a panacea? The effect of cooperative response to task conflict on team performance
Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews › RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal › peer-review
Author(s)
Related Research Unit(s)
Detail(s)
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 163-178 |
Journal / Publication | Systems Research and Behavioral Science |
Volume | 29 |
Issue number | 2 |
Publication status | Published - Mar 2012 |
Link(s)
Abstract
Task conflict is unavoidable, and cooperation is widely adopted to manage task conflict within work teams. Prior studies demonstrated that the effects of cooperative response to task conflict on team performance can be positive or none. To explain the inconsistent effects, based on cooperation and competition theory, this study explores how and when cooperative response to task conflict increases team performance. Seventy-one work teams from Chinese organizations responded to a survey. Results show that knowledge integration mediates the positive effect of cooperative response to task conflict on team performance. More interestingly, need for cognition and resource interdependence moderate the aforementioned mediating process in such a way that cooperative response increases team performance through knowledge integration only when need for cognition is high or when resource interdependence is high. Finally, theoretical and managerial implications are discussed. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Research Area(s)
- Cooperative response to task conflict, Knowledge integration, Need for cognition, Resource interdependence, Team performance
Citation Format(s)
Is cooperation a panacea? The effect of cooperative response to task conflict on team performance. / Chen, Zhen-Jiao; Qin, Xin; Vogel, Douglas.
In: Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol. 29, No. 2, 03.2012, p. 163-178.
In: Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol. 29, No. 2, 03.2012, p. 163-178.
Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews › RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal › peer-review