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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
The sample for this study was drawn from a larger dataset used in previous research reported by Lee et al. (2014). The variables in the current study do not overlap with those of the previous study.
Two of the more common approaches for assessing relations in social networks research are binary networks and valued networks. The binary approach is often used to assess relations on the basis of strength (e.g., strong versus weak ties) or the presence (e.g., ties present or absent). In contrast, the valued network approach is often used to assess group closure, or the overall level of connectivity between members in a group (e.g., Oh et al. 2004). When network data are captured using a continuous measure, the valued approach makes use of the full range of reported responses, whereas the binary approach often results in a dichotomization of the valued data (Hanneman and Riddle 2005). To provide a more comprehensive test of our conceptual model, we employed both approaches in the current study. Because hypothesis testing using both approaches provided similar results, we chose to report only the binary approach in the remainder of the manuscript. We chose the binary perspective as it is more closely aligned with our expectation that team performance is impacted differentially based on the dyadic co-presence of friendship and conflict.
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.
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.
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.
Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2006). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 419–439.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Gould, R. V. (1991). Multiple networks and mobilization in the Paris commune, 1871. American Sociological Review, 56, 716–729.
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.
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.
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.
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.
Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside: University of California.
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.
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.
Hobfoll, S. F. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524.
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.
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.
Ibarra, H. (1993). Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 471–501.
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.
Ingram, P., & Zou, X. (2008). Business friendships. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 167–184. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.006.
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.
Jackson, M., & Moreland, R. L. (2009). Transactive memory in the classroom. Small Group Research, 40, 508–534.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282.
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530–557.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Mesmer-Magnus, J., & DeChurch, L. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546.
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 Press
Nelson, J., & Aboud, F. E. (1985). The resolution of social conflict between friends. Child Development, 56, 1009–1017.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615–631.
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.
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.
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.
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.
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.
Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 219–237.
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.
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.
Simon, H. A., (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399.
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.
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.
Verbrugge, L. M. (1979). Multiplexity in adult friendships. Social Forces, 57, 1286–1309.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wildman, J. L., & Bedwell, W. L. (2013). Practicing what we preach: Teaching teams using validated team science. Small Group Research, 44, 381–394.
Wooldridge, B., & Floyd, S. W. (1990). The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 231–241.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Hood, A.C., Cruz, K.S. & Bachrach, D.G. Conflicts with Friends: A Multiplex View of Friendship and Conflict and Its Association with Performance in Teams. J Bus Psychol 32, 73–86 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9436-y
- Intrateam conflict involvement
- Team performance
- Social networks