Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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 via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

References

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2006). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 419–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobfoll, S. F. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, H. (1993). Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 471–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, P., & Zou, X. (2008). Business friendships. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 167–184. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M., & Moreland, R. L. (2009). Transactive memory in the classroom. Small Group Research, 40, 508–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Mesmer-Magnus, J., & DeChurch, L. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 219–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A., (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbrugge, L. M. (1979). Multiplexity in adult friendships. Social Forces, 57, 1286–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wildman, J. L., & Bedwell, W. L. (2013). Practicing what we preach: Teaching teams using validated team science. Small Group Research, 44, 381–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, B., & Floyd, S. W. (1990). The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 231–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

Download references

Acknowledgments

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony C. Hood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9436-y

Keywords

Navigation