The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions in Organizational Groups
Abstract
I thank the interviewed organizational members for their assistance and patience and Jonathon Blake, Roxanne Jones-Toler, Keith Murnighan, and Keith Weigelt for their assistance on this paper. This paper presents a multifaceted qualitative investigation of everyday conflict in six organizational work teams. Repeated interviews and on-site observations provide data on participants' perceptions, behaviors, and their own analyses of their conflicts, resulting in a generalized conflict model. Model evaluation indicates that relationship conflict is detrimental to performance and satisfaction; process conflict is also detrimental to performance; and task conflict's effects on performance depend on specified dimensions. In particular, emotionality reduces effectiveness, resolution potential and acceptability norms increase effectiveness, and importance accentuates conflict's other effects. Groups with norms that accept task but not relationship conflict are most effective. The model and the findings help to broaden understanding of dynamics of organizational conflict and suggest ways it can either be alleviated or wisely encouraged.'
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667054 · Cited by 3,359
Self-citationEnhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x · Cited by 2,623
THE DYNAMIC NATURE OF CONFLICT: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF INTRAGROUP CONFLICT AND GROUP PERFORMANCE.
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/3069453 · Cited by 2,487
Self-citationEly, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667087 · Cited by 2,433
Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0122 · Cited by 1,072
Metadata
- Authors
- Jehn, K. A.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1997-09
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 530
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1515158344
- Cited by
- 2,165
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 62.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions in Organizational Groups. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2393737
- The paper
- Jehn, K. A. (1997). A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions in Organizational Groups. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393737
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.