Citation
(2013), "2012 Awards for Excellence", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 24 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijcma.2013.34424aaa.002
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2013, Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2012 Awards for Excellence
Article Type: 2012 Awards for Excellence From: International Journal of Conflict Management, Volume 24, Issue 1
The following article was selected for this year's Outstanding Paper Award for International Journal of Conflict Management
"Is too much cognitive conflict in strategic decision-making teams too bad?''
Satyanarayana ParayitamUniversity of Massachusetts Dartmouth, North Dartmouth, Massachusetts, USARobert S. DooleyOklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA
Purpose - Past research on strategic decision making has emphasized the influence of cognitive conflict and affective conflict on the decision outcomes. Early researchers demonstrated that affective conflict has negative outcomes whereas cognitive conflict has positive outcomes. While the negative outcomes of affective conflict remain non-controversial, the positive outcomes of cognitive conflict are not always consistent. The research on the outcomes of cognitive conflict is perplexedly mixed. Taking an information processing perspective, the present study aims to examine the relationship between cognitive conflict on decision outcomes, while controlling for affective conflict.Design/methodology/approach - The authors surveyed 109 hospitals in the USA and collected data from top management teams (CEOs and senior executives). After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data were analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to examine the curvilinear relationships between cognitive conflict among the teams and its influence on decision quality and decision understanding.Findings - Analysis of team data supports the hypotheses that there exists curvilinear (inverted-U shaped) relationship between cognitive conflict and decision quality, and between cognitive conflict and decision commitment.Research limitations/implications -- Since the data were collected from self-report measures, limitations of social desirability bias may be inherent.Practical implications -- Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between cognitive conflict and decision outcomes extends to the existing strategic management literature. Further, the findings from this study are particularly useful for practicing managers. This study suggests that CEO and team members need not overemphasize cognitive conflict beyond a limit because it may have deleterious consequences. The findings reveal that a moderate level of cognitive conflict, instead of too much conflict, is always desirable.Originality/value -- Though the sample in the present study focuses only on the healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decisionKeywords - Affective conflict, Chief executives, Cognitive conflict, Corporate strategy, Decision commitment, Decision making, Decision quality, United States of America
www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/10444061111171350
This article originally appeared in Volume 22 Number 4, 2011, pp. 342-57, International Journal of Conflict Management
The following articles were selected for this year's Highly Commended Award
"Effects of task and relationship conflicts on individual work behaviors''
Lin Lu, Fan ZhouKwok Leung
This article originally appeared in Volume 22 Number 2, 2011, International Journal of Conflict Management
"A cross-cultural comparison of intragroup conflict in The Netherlands and Brazil''
Daan BisselingFilipe Sobral
This article originally appeared in Volume 22 Number 2, 2011, International Journal of Conflict Management
"Good organizational soldiers: conflict-related stress predicts citizenship behavior''
Charlotte M. Karam
This article originally appeared in Volume 22 Number 3, 2011, International Journal of Conflict Management
Outstanding Reviewers
Jean PoitrasHEC Montreal, Canada
Dean TjosvoldLingnan University, Hong Kong