Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 73–86 | Cite as

Conflicts with Friends: A Multiplex View of Friendship and Conflict and Its Association with Performance in Teams

  • Anthony C. HoodEmail author
  • Kevin S. Cruz
  • Daniel G. Bachrach
Original Paper


Drawing on conservation of resources theory, multiplex social networks research, and the emerging conflict involvement perspective, the purpose of this study is to develop and test a multiplex view of conflict that explicitly accounts for the nature of the social relationships between those involved in intrateam conflict and how these multiplex relationships differentially impact team performance. Data were collected from 120 teams engaged in a 4-month business simulation. Relationship conflicts occurring among team members who are friends have a negative impact on team performance, whereas those occurring between non-friends have a positive impact on team performance. Although we also find non-friend task conflicts to be beneficial for team performance, friend task conflicts have no impact on team performance. This study highlights the dark side of workplace friendships and admonishes managers to pay close attention not only to conflicts among employees, but also to the relational closeness of those involved in conflict. The current study provides empirical support for the emerging conflict involvement perspective by explicitly assessing the number of individuals involved in conflict as well as the type of relationships between them. We also extend research on multiplex relationships from the individual to the team level of analysis. Finally, we respond to calls for studies of multiplexity that include both positive and negative relationships.


Intrateam conflict involvement Team performance Social networks Friendship 



The authors would like to thank Steve Borgatti, Lindred Greer and Karen Jehn for their helpful feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript. We also thank associate editor Julie Olson‐Buchanan and three anonymous reviewers for their developmental feedback.


  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, 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin, T. T., Bedell, M. D., & Johnson, J. L. (1997). The social fabric of a team-based M.B.A. program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1369–1397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balkundi, P., & Harrison, D. A. (2006). Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effect on team viability and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 49–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2006). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 419–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brass, D. J., Butterfield, K. D., & Skaggs, B. C. (1998). Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 23, 14–31.Google Scholar
  6. Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 795–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1217–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chua, R. Y. J., Ingram, P., & Morris, M. W. (2008). From the head and the heart: Locating cognition-and affect-based trust in managers’ professional networks. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 436–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen, M.-H. (2006). Understanding the benefits and detriments of conflict on team creativity process. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(1), 105-116. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2006.00373.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cross, R., Borgatti, S. P., & Parker, A. (2002). Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(22), 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DeChurch, L. A., Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Doty, D. (2013). Moving beyond relationship and task conflict:toward a process-state perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(4), 559–578. doi: 10.1037/a0032896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Clercq, D., & Rangarajan, D. (2008). The role of perceived relational support in entrepreneur–customer dyads. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(4), 659–683. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00247.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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, 32, 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741–749.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. de Wit, F. R. C., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 360–390. doi: 10.1037/a0024844.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. DeShon, R. P., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R., & Wiechmann, D. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035–1056.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Desivilya, H. S., Somech, A., & Lidgoster, H. (2010). Innovation and conflict management in work teams: The effects of team identification and task and relationship conflict. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 3(1), 28–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-4716.2009.00048.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ellis, A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Porter, C. O., West, B., & Moon, H. (2003). Team learning: Collectively connecting the dots. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 821–835.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Gonzalez-Mulé, E., Courtright, S. H., DeGeest, D., Seong, J.-Y., & Hong, D.-S. (2014). Channeled autonomy: The joint effects of autonomy and feedback on team performance through organizational goal clarity. Journal of Management. doi: 10.1177/0149206314535443.
  21. Gould, R. V. (1991). Multiple networks and mobilization in the Paris commune, 1871. American Sociological Review, 56, 716–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greer, L.L., de Hoogh, A. H. B., Jehn, K.A., & Lytle, A. (2009). Who’s fighting? The role of intragroup conflict involvement on team outcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  25. Grosser, T. J., Lopez-Kidwell, V., & Labianca, G. (2010). A social network analysis of positive and negative gossip in organizational life. Group and Organization Management, 35, 177–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Bowler, W. M. (2007). Emotional exhaustion and job performance: The mediating role of motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 93–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside: University of California.Google Scholar
  28. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Henttonen, K. (2010). Exploring social networks on the team level—A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 27(1–2), 74–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hobfoll, S. F. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., LePine, J. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Hedlund, J. (1998). Extending the multilevel theory of team decision making: Effects of feedback and experience in hierarchical teams. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 269–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1128–1145.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ibarra, H. (1993). Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 471–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ingram, P., & Roberts, P. (2000). Friendships among competitors in the sydney hotel industry. American Journal of Sociology, 106(2), 387–423. doi: 10.1086/316965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ingram, P., & Zou, X. (2008). Business friendships. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 167–184. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ismail, K. M., Richard, O. C., & Taylor, E. C. (2012). Relationship conflict in supervisor-subordinate dyads: a subordinate perspective. International Journal of Conflict Management, 23, 192–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jackson, M., & Moreland, R. L. (2009). Transactive memory in the classroom. Small Group Research, 40, 508–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  39. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jehn, K. A., & Bendersky, C. (2003). Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 187–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 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, 238–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jehn, K. A., Rispens, S., Jonsen, K., & Greer, L. (2013). Conflict contagion: a temporal perspective on the development of conflict within teams. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24, 352–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jehn, K. A., Rispens, S., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2010). The effects of conflict asymmetry on work and individual outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 596–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jehn, K. A., & Shah, P. P. (1997). Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediating processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 775–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kacmar, K. M., Bachrach, D. G., Harris, K. J., & Noble, D. (2012). Exploring the role of supervisor trust in the associations between multiple sources of relationship conflict and organizational citizenship behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Klein, K. J., Lim, B.-C., Saltz, J. L., & Mayer, D. M. (2004). How do they get there? An examination of the antecedents of centrality in team networks. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 952–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Korsgaard, M. A., Soyoung Jeong, S., Mahony, D. M., & Pitariu, A. H. (2008). A multilevel view of intragroup conflict. Journal of Management, 34, 1222–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Chao, G. T. (2012). The dynamics of emergence: Cognition and cohesion in work teams. Managerial and Decision Economics, 33, 335–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  51. Kuwabara, K., Luo, J., & Sheldon, O. (2010). Multiplex exchange relations. In S. R. Thye & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 27, pp. 239–268). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Labianca, G., & Brass, D. J. (2006). Exploring the social ledger: Negative relationships and negative asymmetry in social networks in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 31, 596–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Labianca, G., Brass, D. J., & Gray, B. (1998). Social networks and perceptions of intergroup conflict: The role of negative relationships and third parties. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lee, J.-Y., Bachrach, D. G., & Lewis, K. (2014). Social network ties, transactive memory, and performance in groups. Organization Science, 25(3), 951–967. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2013.0884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2000). Performance implications of leader briefings and team interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 971–986.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Methot, J. R., LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & Christian, J. S. (2015). Are workplace friendships a mixed blessing? Exploring tradeoffs of multiplex relationships and their associations with job performance. Personnel Psychology. doi: 10.1111/peps.12109.Google Scholar
  57. Mesmer-Magnus, J., & DeChurch, L. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. National Research Council (2015) Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. In: Committee on the Science of Team Science, Nancy JC, Margaret LH (eds) Board on behavioral, cognitive, and sensory sciences, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies PressGoogle Scholar
  59. Nelson, J., & Aboud, F. E. (1985). The resolution of social conflict between friends. Child Development, 56, 1009–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Oh, H., Chung, M.-H., & Labianca, G. (2004). Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 860–875. doi: 10.2307/20159627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Olson, B. J., Parayitam, S., & Bao, Y. (2007). Strategic decision making: The effects of cognitive diversity, and conflict, and trust on decision outcomes. Journal of Management, 33(2), 196–222. doi: 10.1177/0149206306298657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. O’Neill, T. A., McLarnon, M. J. W., Hoffart, G. C., Woodley, H. J. R., & Allen, N. J. (2015). The structure and function of team conflict state profiles. Journal of Management. doi: 10.1177/0149206315581662.Google Scholar
  63. Palazzolo, E. T., Serb, D. A., She, Y., Su, C., & Contractor, N. S. (2006). Coevolution of communication and knowledge networks in transactive memory system: Using computational models for theoretical development. Communication Theory, 16, 223–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rispens, S., Greer, L., Jehn, K. A., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2011). Not so bad after all: How relational closeness buffers the association between relationship conflict and helpful and deviant group behaviors. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 4, 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Schulte, M., Cohen, N. A., & Klein, K. J. (2012). The coevolution of network ties and perceptions of team psychological safety. Organization Science, 23, 564–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Rechner, P. L. (1989). Experiential effects of dialectical inquiry, devil’s advocacy, and consensus approaches to strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 745–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 219–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Shah, P. P., Dirks, K. T., & Chervany, N. (2006). The multiple pathways of high performing groups: The interaction of social networks and group processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Shaw, J. D., Zhu, J., Duffy, M. K., Scott, K. L., Shih, H.-A., & Susanto, E. (2011). A contingency model of conflict and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 391–400.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Simon, H. A., (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  74. Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 102–111.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2013). Translating Team Creativity to Innovation Implementation: The Role of Team Composition and Climate for Innovation. Journal of Management, 39(3), 684–708. doi: 10.1177/0149206310394187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Uchino, B., Holt-Lunstad, J., Uno, D., & Flinders, J. (2001). Heterogeneity in the social networks of young and older adults: Prediction of mental health and cardiovascular reactivity during acute stress. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 24, 361–382.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Umphress, E., Labianca, G., Brass, D. J., Kass, E. E., & Scholten, L. (2003). The role of instrumental and expressive social ties in employees’ perceptions of organizational justice. Organization Science, 14, 738–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Verbrugge, L. M. (1979). Multiplexity in adult friendships. Social Forces, 57, 1286–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wildman, J. L., & Bedwell, W. L. (2013). Practicing what we preach: Teaching teams using validated team science. Small Group Research, 44, 381–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wooldridge, B., & Floyd, S. W. (1990). The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 231–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Xin, K. R., & Pelled, L. H. (2003). Supervisor–subordinate conflict and perceptions of leadership behavior: a field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(1), 25–40. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00185-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Zagenczyk, T. J., Gibney, R., Murrell, A. J., & Boss, S. R. (2008). Friends don’t make friends good citizens, but advisors do. Group and Organization Management, 33, 760–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Zagenczyk, T. J., Purvis, R. L., Shoss, M. K., Scott, K. L., & Cruz, K. S. (2015). Social influence and leader perceptions: Multiplex social network ties and similarity in leader–member exchange. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zagenczyk, T. J., Scott, K. D., Gibney, R., Murrell, A. J., & Thatcher, J. B. (2010). Social influence and perceived organizational support: A social networks analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 111, 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zhou, J., Shin, S. J., Brass, D. J., Choi, J., & Zhang, Z. X. (2009). Social networks, personal values, and creativity: Evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1544–1552.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Zou, X., & Ingram, P. (2014). The grand duality: Who sees competition within friendship, and how do they perform at work?. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Meeting, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony C. Hood
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kevin S. Cruz
    • 2
  • Daniel G. Bachrach
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Management, Information Systems & Quantitative Methods, Collat School of BusinessUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA
  2. 2.Department of Management, Robins School of BusinessUniversity of RichmondRichmondUSA
  3. 3.Department of Management and Marketing, Culverhouse College of CommerceUniversity of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations