1. Trang chủ
  2. » Luận Văn - Báo Cáo

The effect of conflict to social loafing in group work of organization research in ho chi minh city, vietnam

10 6 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 10
Dung lượng 39,74 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

TheEffectOfConflicttoSocialLoafinginGroupWorkofOrganiza tion-ResearchinHoChiMinh City, Vietnam VuBaThanh FoodFarmCompanyLimited.,Vietnam NgoVanToan UniversityofFinance–Marketing,Vietnam

Trang 1

TheEffectOfConflicttoSocialLoafinginGroupWorkofOrganiza

tion-ResearchinHoChiMinh City, Vietnam

VuBaThanh

FoodFarmCompanyLimited.,Vietnam

NgoVanToan

UniversityofFinance–Marketing,Vietnam

Abstract

Thisstudyexplorestheimpactofconflictsonsocialloafingintheorganization'sgroupwork.Thr oughquantitativeanalysisofthesurveydatafor457civilservantsworkinginHoChiMinhcitytoevaluatethesca lea n d researchmodel.Researchresultsshowthatthethreecomponentsofconflict: taskconflict,r elationshipconflicts,andprocessconflicthavethesameeffect onthesocialloafingoftheindividualint hegroup.Theresultsalsoshowthatconflictingrelationshipswillhavethegreatestimpactonsocialloafing Therefore,eachorganizationshouldtakemeasurestoreducesocialloafinginordertoreducetheuncert aintyofmembersintheprocessofgroupwork

Keywords:Socialloafing,Conflict,Groupwork,HoChiMinhCity

1.Introduction

Inthelifeofthehumanworkinggroupisindispensable.AccordingtoKarau&Williams(1993),wej ointeamstoperformmanyimportanttasksthatrequirecollectiveefforttoworktogethertoaddresstheulti mategoaloforganizationset.Groupactivityisnotlimitedtoanyfieldandinanyarearequiresteamexistenc eandteamworkisessential.AsPooleetal

(2004)statedthat"peopleliveingroups,workingroups,andplayingroups."Ho wev er, w he n worki ngingroups,theconflictbe t we e n membersis unavoidable.Ac co rding to T u c k m a n (1965),ac onflictisaplacethatwillexplainthediscoveryofsocialloafingamongindividualsinthatc o m m u n i t y Althoughteamworkishighlyrecommended,socialloafingin

thegroupshouldnotbeignored,socialloafingwillreducetheeffectivenessofthegroup(Lataneetal.,197 9).Thus,theconflictinthecollectivewilltakeplaceandthen whatwilltheme mber s oftherestofthe way?

Understandingtheimportance ofcollectiveconflictandsocialloafingamongindividualsintheorganiz ation,theauthorsexploretheimpactofconflictsonsocialloafinginthisstudy

2.Theoreticalbackgroundandresearchmodel

Conflict

Groupworkinthe organizationisa"tool"forustofeelthe disturbanceinthegroup Conflictariseswhenteammembersarenotawareofacommongoalandtheinterventionsofeachmember toachievethatgoalared i ff e r e n t (Singhetal.,2017).Conflictislikelytomakethegroupmember s'cohesionlesslikely,andgroupcohesionwillalsodecreaseiftheconflictsbetweenmembersarelarge(Je hn,1995)

Trang 2

Conflictsidentifiedbyresearchersconsistedofthreecomponents:taskconflicts,relationshipconflict sandprocessconflicts(Jehn,1997;Jehn&Mannix,2001).Taskconflictsaredefinedasdisagreementsandargum entsa m o n g teammembersaboutthecontentoftheworkandthegoalstobeachieved,orargumen tsaboutthem e r i t s ofaproblemintheteam(Behfaretal.,2011;DeDreu&Weingart,2003;Jenn,1995,19 97;Priem&Price,1 9 9 1 ) Whenaconflictofinterestismoderate,ithelpstheteammemberstobetterun derstandthegoalsandwillhelpthemgetmoreideas.Asaresult,

thegroupwillbemoreefficientandtheproductivityof

thegroupwillbeincreased(Amason,1996;Jehn,1995;Schweiger,Sandberg&Rechner,1989;Cozier&

Rose,1977).Inaddition,ifhigh-leveltaskconflictsinthegroupresultinmoreindividualconservatismwiththeirproposals,theeffectivene ssofthegroupwilldeteriorateandthequalityoftheterminationRelationshipsamongmembersa r e als oreduced (DeChurch,Hamilton,& Haas, 2007;Tidd, McIntyre &Friedman,2004;Simons& Peterson,2 0 0 0 ) Conflictisasocialconflictoremotionalconflictthatarisesfromdifferencesinthevaluea ndpersonalityofeachindividual.Inaddition,conflictinrelationshipsisofteninfluencedbyhostility,tensionan ddiscomforta m o n g teammembers(Behfaretal.,2011;DeDreu&Weingart,2003;Pearson,Ensley& Amason,Jenn,1995,1 9 9 7 ; Priem&Price,1991).Relationshipshaveanegativeimpactongrouppr oductivityandjobsatisfaction( W a l l &Nolan,1986).Processconflictisthedisagreementabouthowb esttomixresourcesfromgroupwork,includingtimei s s u e s a nd workloaddistribution( J a n i c i k & B a r t

e l , 2003).P r o c e s s conflictsc a n r e du c e thee ffi c i e n c y oftheteamaswellastheabilitytocoor dinatetasksinthemostefficientway(Deutsch,1973;Jehn

&Chatman,2 0 0 0 ) I n addition,processc o n fl i c t s c a n negativelya ff e c t thes a t i s f a c t i o n ofm embersw h e n workingtogetherbycausingfeelingsofdisrespectandunfairnessinthegroup(Lind& Tyler,1988).Thesethreetypesofconflictsnotonlyaffecttheperformanceandsatisfactionofthegroup,b utalsothesethreetypesofconflictsareinterrelatedthroughouttheworkinggroup.Jehn's(1997)stu dyhasproventhatconflicts ofinterestc a n bet r a n s f o r m e d intoconflictingr e l a t i o ns hi ps w he nc

r i t i c i s ms regardingtaskperformancea r e c o n s i d e r e d negativeorunresolvedtasks.Successfu l.ResearchbyBehfaretal

(2008)alsosuggeststhatprocessconflictswillreachahigherlevelthanallothertypesofconflictingroupinte raction

SocialLoafing

Theoriginofsocialloafing beganwithresearcherRingelmann(1913,ledbyLatanéetal.,197 9;Simms,2 0 1 4 ) , whoexperimentedwithparticipantsinpullingaropewhentheparticipantspullth erope,theyworkl e s s andtheirpullislowerwhentheydoitalone.Asthesizeincreases,theperformancei nthegroupislowerthanthatofanindividualperformingthesamejob.Fromtheaboveobservations,Rin gelmannpointedoutthatwhenworkingingroups,theindividual'seffortwoulddecrease.So,theseeffe ctsarecalledthe"Ringelmanneffect"(Latanéetal.,1979).Afterdiscoveringthe"RingelmannEffect," manyresearchershavecomeupwithstatementsfor thiseffect Steiner(1972),ledbySingh(20 17),proposedtwoexplanationsto e x p l a i n theRingelmanneffect:Oneisindividualswithoutm otivationtopulltheropeorbythosewholackmotivation.Reduceeffort,especiallywhengroupsizeincrea ses.Thesecondexplanationisthattheteammaynotworktogethersothattheeffortsofthemembersarenot optimal.Ingham,Levinger,Graves,andPeckham( 1 9 7 4 ) repeatedtheropespinningexperiment.Inthise xperiment,researchersaskedparticipantstoblindtheire y e s topulltheropeandmakethetesttakersbe lievetheywerepullingtheropealongwithothers,whileinf a c t , Theyhavetodoitalone.Andtheresultsh aveshownthattheindividual'sperformanceisstilllowerthanwhentheyknowtheywillperformalone.Willi ams&etal(1981)expandedtheexperimentandcametotheconclusionthatiftheeffortsoftheindividua lsintheorganizationweremeasured,thosewhocausedconflictorcauseindifferencewoulddecreasean dTheirresearchfocusesonthestudyofhowtomeasuretheoutputofindividualsintheorganization.W ithInghametal.(1974)andLataneetal

(1979),therearemanyotherauthorsw h o h a v e f o l l o w e d K a r a u e t a l

Trang 3

( 1 9 9 3 ) ; George( 1 9 9 2 ) ; Etemadie t a l

( 2 0 1 5 ) a r g u e thatc o l l e c t i v e resilienceisaphenomenonwheretheindividual'seffortstoachieveagoal whentheyworkinateamarelowerwhentheindividualworksindependently

Trang 4

Task conflict (TC)

Relationship conflict (RC) Social loafing (SL)

Process conflict (PC)

Therelationshipbetweenconflictandsocialloafing

Socialloafingisdirectlyprovokedbytheconflictbetweenindividualsbecausetheperceptionofu nfairworkandthedistributionofunfairrewardsiswheresocialloafingbegins.Negativeinfluence scausedbyconflictamongteammemberscanbelengthened,leavingmemberstoremainindi fferentto theworkthatn e e d s tobedonewithinthegroup(Öhman,Flykt,&Esteves,2001)

Inaddition,socialloafingalsocomesdirectly orindirectlyfromconflictingrelationships.Dire ctengagementofindividualswithinthegroupcanbeinitiatedbyarguingtowithdrawfromthisconflic tandm a y atleastreduceone'scontributiontothegroup(i.e.twobasicfactorsdeterminingcollectiv eignorance).Althoughwithdrawingfromtheconflictofrelationshipsandreducingeffortsinthegroupdoesn otmeanthatsupportforcollectiveredundancyoccurs,theissueisalsoconsideredtohavenegativeeffectson productivitya n d groupspirit(Deutsch, 1973) Baxter(1982)likewisearguesthatavoidingconfli ctingrelationshipsisac o m m o n meansofdealingwithconflictwithinthegroup.Teammembersare quitealertandsensitivetothosew h o tendtoavoidandworktoreduceconflictwithinthegroupbecausetheyd onotwanttobeunfairlyjudgedbypotentiall a z y people.c o n fl i c t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p A t thesameti me,relationshipconflictc a n a l s o a ff e c t collectiven e u t r a l i t y t h r o u g h reconciliation(Jehn,1 9

9 7 ) Basedontheaboveanalysisofther e l a t i o n s h i p betweencollectiveindifference,conflictofrel ations,itcanbeseenthatbothconflictandconflictcandirectlyc a u s e collectiveindifferenceinthegro up

Therelationshipbetweentaskconflictsandprocesswithcollectiveignorancemaydependonthelev

shownthatgroupsdiscussanddiscussissuesofgoalsortaskswhenconfrontedwitheachotheratamoder atelevelofwork(Jehn,1995).Theseconflictinginteractionsshowthemotivationofteammemberstoreorga nizethegroup'sresourcestructurebyassigningtherightjobtotherightperson.Theycan

alsominimizecollectivenegligencebecausegroupmembersbelievethattheiri n v o l v e m e n t in resolvingtasksorconflictingprocessesis meaningfulandimportanttoachievingpersonalgoal s.aswellasthegroup(KarauandWilliams,1993)

Fromtheabovediscussion,theauthorsproposethefollowingresearchmodel

Model:Themodelaimstoexaminethefactorsthataffectorganizationalequality

SL     1*TC   2*RC   3*PC

3.Researchmethodology

usingqualitative-quantitativeresearchmethod.Thequalitativemethodisusedtofindthescalethatmatchesthe

modelandthenusesaquantitativemethodtoverifythatthemodelisappropriate.Thedataw a s collecte dfromstaffworkingatorganizationsinHoChiMinhCitythroughconvenientsampling

Trang 5

Thedata collection toolconsists of3parts First,thetoolincludesdemographic questionsd esignedtodeterminetheage,gender,location,thetimetheyworkattheorganizationandfindoutifthe yarepartofateam.ornot.Inthe

secondpart,18questionsaredesignedtomeasurethecompositionofconflictelementsina n organizatio n.Andfinally,thethirdpartisthe10questionsthataredesignedtomeasureorganizationalignorance.T hesescalesareusedontheLikertscaleof5levelsfromlevel1to"completelydisagree" tolevel 5a s "absolutelyagree".Thenumberofparticipantsinthisstudywas457

4.Analysisofdataandresults

Cronbach’sAlphaandExploratoryFactorAnalysis

VerificationofCronbach'sAlphascalereliabilityshowedthatfourobservationvariablesofprocessconflict ( P C ) , 3 observationvariablesoftaskconflictv a r i a b l e ( T C ) , 3 v a r i a b l e observationvariables(

R C ) , a n d 8 observablevariablesin10variablesofcollectivebarometricvariability(SL)

(observedvariablesSL3

andSL7withindexlessthan0.3shouldbeexcluded)havethereliabilityHighdependence(greatert han0.6),thesei n d e p e n d e n t variableswill be includedfor EFAanalysisforthe nextstep AfterperformingEFAasshowninTable1,theKMO=0.751>

0.6indicatesthattheresultsoftheEFAanalysisarereliableandthattheanalysisi s appropriate.Sigv alue.=0.000≤0.05intheBattletestshowedthattheanalysisresultswerestatisticallysignifica ntlygreaterthan95%andtheobservedvariableswerecorrelatedintheoverall.Thetotalvarianceof6 3

8 0 2 % representingthefactorsderivedfromtheanalysiscanaccountfor63.802%ofthevar iationintheinitials u r v e y d a t a T h e c o e ffi c i e n t ofE i g e n v a l u e s ofthefourf a c t o r s i n them

o d e l i s e q u a l to1 , 8 3 5 > 1 , c o n fi r m i n g thattherewillbethreefactorsderivedfromtheanalysisa ndthefactorloadfactoroftheobservedvariablesineachfactorofthevariables.Observationsineachfac toraregreaterthan0.5showingthegoodrepresentationofthevariablesforthefactorthatthevariablesr epresent.TheresultsinTable1alsoshowthatf a c t o r s thatrepresentresearchconceptsandarehighl yreliablearewellsuitedforsubsequentanalyzes

Bảng1:ResultsofCronbach’sAlphaandEFA

Cronbach'sAlpha=0,724

Cronbach'sAlpha=0,772

Cronbach'sAlpha=0,762

SL1

0

0.856

Cronbach'sAlpha=0,861

Trang 6

79

Trang 7

SL2 0.597

Invalidmethod 32.106 49.949 63.802 51.786

Eigenvalues 3.211 1.784 1.385 4.143

KMO=0,751 Sig=0.00

0 Sig=0.000 Sig=0.000 Sig=0.000

Regressionresults

TheauthorsperformedregressionanalysiswithSLdependentvariablesandthreeindependentvariabl es,T C , RCandPC.ResultsarepresentedinTable2

Table2:Resultsofregressionanalysis

Model

Unstandardize dCoefficients StandardizedCoefficient

CollinearityStatistic s

1

TaskConflict(TC) 211 020 345 10.548 000 0.941 1.062 RelationshipConflic

ProcessConflict(PC) 234 025 321 9.410 000 0.863 1.159 a.Biếnphụthuộc:SocialLoafing(SL)

R2=0,546;A d j R2=0,543

F=181,030;Sig.=0,000

FromtheregressionresultofTable2,theR2coefficientis0.546andtheR2correctionis0.543.Thus, themodelwith3taskconflictvariables(TCs),conflictrelationships(RC)andprocessconflicts(PC)accounted for5 4 3 % oftheimpactofconflictingcomponentscollectiveindifferenceinthegroup.Sigvalue=0 000(<0.05),s o thecombinationoftwoindependentvariablescanexplainthevariabilityofthede pendentvariable.ThemagnifiedcoefficientsoftheVIFvariance(Table2)areless

than2,indicatingthattheregression modeldoesnotoccurinmulti-collinearphenomena(whenVIFexceeds10,multipliersoccurandwhenVIFisgreaterthan2 , itisnecessar ytobecarefulininterpretingtheregressionweights

Regressionanalysisgivesusthenormalizedlinearregressionequationasfollows

OJ  0.345*TC  0.377*RC  0.321*PC

Throughtheaboveequation,itcanbeseenthattheTC,RCandPCcomponentshavethesameeffect onthebehaviorofcardissuersoforganizationsinHoChiMinhCity.Fromtheequationonthecomponent sofconflicts,thelevelsofimpactarenearlythesame,buttheinternalcommunicationfactorhasthelowestimp actoncollectiveindifferenceintheorganizationwith0.321

5.Conclusion

Researchresultsshowthatthecomponentsofcollectiveconflicts,suchasconflictsofinterest,confli ctsofrelationshipsandprocessconflicts, havethesameimpactoncollectiveindifference attheo rganizationsinH C M C HoChiMinhCitywitharepresentativesampleof457samples.Inparticular,confli ctingrelationships

Trang 8

aremoststronglyinfluencedbythecollectiveconsciousness,followedbyconflictsofinterestandconflictst hath a v e theleasteffectoncollectiveignorance.ThestudybySimonandPeterson(2000)alsoshowedthat conflictsofdutywouldturnintoconflictsofrelationshipswhenresourceallocationtosolveproblemswaswro ng.Thisdemonstratesthatinordertostimulatecreativityandincreaseefficiency,areductionintaskconflictsis neededa n d thatteammemberswillunderstandmoreaboutthetasksthatneedtobedoneinthetea m(Jehn,1995;Simons&Peterson,2000).Therefore,inordertoreducecollectivenegligence,me mbersoftheorganizationshouldalsoavoidpossibleconflictswhenworkingtogether.Inordertom inimizeconflictsthatmayoccurduringg r o u p w o r k , m e m b e r s n e e d toh a v e a g r e e m e n

t s , r u l e s , ors t a n d a r d s tomanageconflictsw h i l e p e r f o r m i n g g r o u p t a s k s Ina d d i t i o n , thep e r f o r m a n c e oftaskst o a c h i e v e t h e objectivesoft h e w o r k , themembersalsoneedtoclearl yassignresponsibilitiesandrightsofeachmemberwhenperformingtasksinthegroup.Inaddition,whenass igningtaskstoeachmember,theyshouldbeassignedfairlyandappropriatelysothateverymemberofthet eamunderstandsthattheassignmentisappropriatetotheirabilitiesandbelievesthatsuccessThegro up'scontributionisduetothecontributionofthatmember'seffort.Finally,intheeventofaconflict,discu ssions,anddiscussionsneed tobelimitedtofindingmistakesormistakesinthegroupprocessrathert hantheindividual'sfailuretodoso.Forgreaterconflictbetweenindividuals.Fromtheabovesuggestions,c ollectiver e d u n d a n c y w i l l ber e d u c e d i n thee v e n t ofa conflict,a n d i n conflictinggroupope rations,conflictresolutionwillbeeffective.Reducetheteamandmaketheteamworkbetter

However,researchislimitedtotherelationshipbetweenconflictandsocialloafing,somorerese archisn e e d e d

tofindouthowothercomponentsaffectsocialloafing.Inaddition,non-probabilitysamplinginsomecentraldistrictsmaymakethesamplelessrepresentative,sothisisanotherdire ctiontoimprovethesamplingmethod.In addition,thedifferencesofthesurveyedsubjectssuch asage,sex,educationlevel,jobposition a l s o affected the socialloafing.And onesuggestionforfurtherresearchisthatfurtherresearchisneededinas p e c i fi c industrysothatitisp ossibletoidentifywhichsectorfactorshaveastrongimpactonsocialloafing

References

Behfar,K.J.,Mannix,E.A.,Peterson,R.S.,&Trochim,W,M.(2011).Conflictinsmall

groups:Themeaningandconsequencesofprocessconflict.SmallGroup Research,42,127-176.

Behfar,K.,Peterson,R.,Mannix,E.,&Trochim,W.

(2008).Thecriticalroleofconflictresolutioninteams:Acloselookatthelinksbetweenconflicttype,conflictmanagementstrate

gies,andteamoutcomes.JournalofAppliedPsychology,93,170-188

Cosier,R , & Rose,G.

(1977).Cognitiveconflictandgoalconflicteffectso n taskperformance.OrganizationalBehaviorandHumanPerformance,19

,378-391.

DeDreu,C.K.W.,&Weingart,L.R.(2003).Taskversus relationshipconflict,teamperformance,andteammember

satisfaction:Ameta-analysis.JournalofAppliedPsychology,88,741–749.

DeChurch,L.A.,Hamilton,K.L.,&Haas,C.

(2007).Effectsofconflictmanagementstrategiesonperceptionsofintragroupconflict.GroupDynamics:Theory,Research,and

Practice,11,66-78.

Deutsch,M.(1973).Theresolutionofconflict:Constructiveanddestructiveprocesses.NewHaven,CT:YalePress.

Etemadi,M.,Darab,M.G.,Khorasani,E.,Moradi,F.,& Vazirinasab,H

(2015).Socialloafingamongnursesa n d i t s relationwithorganizational justice.International Journal

ofEducationalandPsychologicalResearches,1(2),125-130

George,J.M.

(1992).Extrinsicandintrinsicoriginsofperceivedsocialloafinginorganizations.AcademyofManagementJournal,35,191–

202.

Greer,L.L.,&Jehn,K.A.

(2007).Thepivotalroleofnegativeaffectinunderstandingtheeffectsofprocessconflictongroupperformance.I n E.A.Mannix

,M.A.Neale,&C.P.Anderson(Eds.).Researchonmanaginggroupsandteams(Vol.10,pp.21-43).Greenwich,CT:JAIPress Guetzkow,H.&Gyr,J.(1954).Ananalysisofconflictindecision-makinggroups.HumanRelations,7,367-381

Ingham,A.G.,Levinger,G.,Graves,J.,&Peckham,V.

(1974).TheRingelmanneffect:Studiesofgroupsizeandgroupperformance.Journalo f Experimental Social

Psychology,10(4),371-384

Janicik,G.,&Bartel,C.

(2003).Talkingabouttime:Effectsoftemporalplanningandtimeawarenessnormsongroupcoordinationandperformance.Gro

upDynamics:Theory,Research,and Practice,7,122-134.doi:10.1037/1089-2699.7.2.122

Jehn,K.A.

(1995).Amultimethodexaminationofthebenefitsanddetrimentsofintragroupconflict.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,40,

256-282

Trang 9

(1997).Qualitativeanalysisofconflicttypesanddimensionsinorganizationalgroups.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,42,53

0-557.

Jehn,K.A.,&Mannix,E.A.(2001).Thedynamicnatureofconflict:Alongitudinalstudyofintragroupconflictandgroupperformance.

AcademyofManagementJournal,44,238–251.

Jehn,K., &Chatman,J.

(2000).Theinfluenceofproportionalandperceptualconflictcompositiononteamperformance.InternationalJournalofConflict

Management,11,56-73.

Trang 10

Karau,S.J.,&Williams,K.D.(1993).Socialloafing:Ameta-analyticreviewandtheoreticalintegration.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,65,681-706.

Latané,B.,Williams,K.,&Harkins,S.

(1979).Manyhandsmakelightthework:Thecausesandconsequencesofsocialloafing.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychol

ogy,37,822-832.

Lind,A.,&Tyler,T.(1988).Thesocialpsychologyofprocedural justice.NewYork,NY:PlenumPress.

Öhman,A.,Flykt,A.,&Esteves,F.

(2001).Emotiondrivesattention:Detectingthesnakeinthegrass.JournalofExperimentalPsychology:General,130,466–478

Pearson,A.W.,Ensley,M.D.,&Amason,A.C.

(2002).AnassessmentandrefinementofJehn’sIntragroupConflictScale.TheInternationalJournalofConflictManagement,13,

110-126.

Poole,M.S.,Hollingshead,A.B.,McGrath,J.E.,Moreland,R.L.,&Rohrbaugh,J.(2004).Interdisciplinaryperspectivesonsmallgroups.

SmallGroupResearch,35,3–16.

Priem,R.,&Price,K.(1991).Processandoutcomeexpectationsfor thedialectical inquiry,devil's

advocacy,andconsensustechniques ofstrategicdecisionmaking.GroupandOrganizationStudies,16,206-225

Schweiger,D.,Sandberg,W.&Rechner,P.(1989).Experientialeffectsofdialecticalinquiry,devil's advocacy,andconsensus

approachestostrategicdecisionmaking.AcademyofManagementJournal,32,745-772.

Simons,T.,&Peterson,R.

(2000).Taskconflictandrelationshipconflictintopmanagementteams:Thepivotalroleofintragrouptrust.

JournalofApplied Psychology,83,102-111.

Singh,S.,Wang,H.,&Zhu,M.(2017).PerceptionsofSocial LoafinginGroups:RoleofConflictandEmotions.

Tidd,S.T.,McIntyre,H.H.,&Friedman,R.A.

(2004).Theimportanceofroleambiguityandtrustinconflictperception:Unpackingthetasktorelationshipconflictlinkage.Int

ernationalJournal of Conflict Management,15,364-380.

Tuckman,B.W.(1965).Developmentalsequencesinsmallgroups.Psychological Bulletin,63,384-399

Wall,V.,&Nolan,L.(1986)Perceptionsofinequity,satisfaction,andconflictintask-orientedgroups.HumanRelations,39,1033-1052.

Ngày đăng: 23/10/2022, 12:16

TÀI LIỆU CÙNG NGƯỜI DÙNG

TÀI LIỆU LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm

w