When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sport Management Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/smr

Review

When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport Shannon Kerwina,*, Matthew B. Walkerb , Trevor Boppc a

[73_TD$IF]Department of Sport Management, Brock University 1812, Sir Isaac Brock Way, St. Catharines, Ontario L2S 3A1 Canada [75_TD$IF]Department of Health and Kinesiology, Texas A&M University, 4243 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, United States c Department of Tourism, Recreation and Sport Management, University of Florida, 310 Florida Gym, P.O. Box 118208, Gainesville, FL 32611, United States b

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history: Received 21 June 2016 Received in revised form 11 October 2016 Accepted 11 October 2016 Available online xxx Keywords: Theoretical model Conflict Social identity

A B S T R A C T

The purpose of this article is to advance theoretical understanding of the relationship between task conflict and relationship conflict (i.e., triggering process) by discussing the role of social identity as a mediating factor. Specifically, the authors’ proposed theoretical model emphasizes the consequences of intense, long-lasting task conflict by mapping the connection to workgroup identity formation and relationship conflict. The authors apply social identity theory to provide a new lens through which to view the impact of intense, long-lasting task conflict that goes unmanaged in sport organizations. Further, the authors provide several testable propositions regarding identity and subgroup formation that point to major factors influencing the development of relationship conflict within groups. The authors’ propositions bolster current sport management theory by emphasizing how intergroup and intragroup processes are interwoven. © 2016 Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[7_TD$IF]1. Introduction Within sport organization governing boards, a continuum of conflict is ever-present, as task-related conflict has the potential to develop into relationship conflict (Kerwin, Doherty, & Harman, 2011). Kerwin et al. (2011) concluded that sport board members may come to their board with diverse priorities that may impact board member engagement in task-related disagreement. For example, board members may become passionate when discussing the location of the next national championship, particularly when the members have varying priorities. In this case, the task conflict may become intense and manifest as relationship conflict (Kerwin et al., 2011). Given that nonprofit sport organizations are prone to operating with a fairly loose set of common organizational values and priorities (Kerwin, MacLean, & Bell-Laroche, 2014), the likelihood of intense task conflict developing into relationship conflict becomes a process that needs to be understood and managed. According to attribution theory, group members interpret others’ intentions during group interactions and pass personal judgments on individual motives or agendas (Heider, 1958; Weiner, 1974). When groups regularly interact, this subjective calculus leads to conflict, interpersonal tension, social exclusion, and task withdrawal (Mooney, Holahan, & Amason, 2007; Ren & Gray, 2009). The negative outcomes of regular interaction may be particularly problematic for sport managers who

* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Kerwin), [email protected] (M.B. Walker), tbopp@ufl.edu (T. Bopp). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003 1441-3523/© 2016 Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

2

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

[(Fig._1)TD$IG]

Negative Task-Related Faultlines P3a, P3b

Task Conflict (intense, long-lasting) P1a

Negative Task-Related Faultlines P3c

Workgroup Identity P1b

Relationship Conflict P2

Direct Associaon Parally Mediated Associaon Moderang Relaonship Fig. 1. The proposed model demonstrates the link between intense, long-[72_TD$IF]lasting task conflict, workgroup identity and relationship-based conflicts. The mediating and moderating effects of task-related faultlines are also highlighted.

operate in situations where employees and volunteers are engaging in periods of close, intense interaction (e.g., planning and delivering national or international sport events). Further, volunteer boards of directors in sport have experienced the negative impact of conflict on decision quality and commitment (Hamm-Kerwin & Doherty, 2010). Accordingly, the need to understand how conflict manifests within sport organizations (and groups) is increasingly important for organizational managers and leaders. Researchers have noted that relationship conflict (in particular) yields negative individual and group outcomes within organizations (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003; Hamm-Kerwin & Doherty, 2010; Jehn & Bendersky, 2003; Jehn, Greer, Levine, & Szulanski, 2008; Kerwin et al., 2011). Korsgaard, Ployhart, and Ulrich (2014) contend that despite a history of support for the dysfunction of relationship conflict, an exploration of the contextual conditions (e.g., predisposition to unmanaged conflict) associated with relationship conflict is needed. Relatedly, within sport continued examination of how task-related conflicts trigger or influence relationship conflict is warranted (Kerwin & Doherty, 2012). These relationships may be particularly germane to professional sport, where the presence of both organizational and team identification (Swanson & Kent, 2015; Todd & Kent, 2009) may contribute to the passion that manifests itself in the formation of intense task conflict. Dovidio, Saguy, and Shnabel (2009) noted that both intra- (e.g., conflict) and inter- (e.g., identity) group processes are highly connected. The tenets of social identity theory support this idea by suggesting that individuals align with groups (e.g., organization, workgroup, teams) based on similar personal attributes (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Such group alignment results in the formation of subgroups, which can lead to [78_TD$IF]faultlines (i.e., tensions) between the larger group and subgroup members (Bezrukova, Thatcher, Jehn, & Spell, 2012; Lawrence & Zyphur, 2011). Consequently, as the subgroup becomes socially relevant to its members, faultlines within the larger group will manifest (Bezrukova, Thatcher, & Jehn, 2007; Lau & Murnighan, 2005; Li & Hambrick, 2005). However, relevant to the contribution of the current [79_TD$IF]article, scant theoretical attention has been placed on identifying the role that social identity plays in the conflict paradigm in general and in sport specifically. Connecting social identity to faultline formation could suggest that in-group and out-group membership stem from individual preferences toward group identification (van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007; van Knippenberg, Dawson, West, & Homan, 2011; Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). Faultline formation is especially relevant to sport organizations, as sport employees and volunteers develop high levels of organizational identity, primarily stemming from their love of sport and/or specific team fandom (Swanson & Kent, 2015; Todd & Kent, 2009). Although this form of identification is positive, it can also result in negative feelings toward outgroup members, which may be dysfunctional to organizational effectiveness when subgroup faultlines are present. Therefore, understanding how group identification occurs is fundamental to illuminate how the conflict triggering process manifests in sport organizations. The purpose of this article is to advance the theoretical understanding of the relationship between task conflict and relationship conflict (i.e., triggering process) by discussing the role of social identity as a mediating factor. As shown in Fig. 1, we suggest that identity targets and potential subgroup (i.e., task-related) faultlines are formative factors that influence the conflict-to-conflict association. In particular, the antecedent conditions to conflict have traditionally included task-based (e.g., formalization) or contextually-based factors (e.g., interdependence; Mooney et al., 2007). However, certain individual and group factors may be more influential in conflict processes. For example, Kerwin et al. (2011) recognized that individuals on sport boards have unique perceptions of their own role in conflict episodes when compared to others, which underpins the importance of social identity in conflict theory. Further, Kerwin (2013) highlighted the role of in-group and out-group membership on the development of relationship conflict in the sport setting; however, the theoretical mechanisms underlying this association are still unknown. As such, we focus on social identity theory as a viable theoretical lens to explain how intense long-lasting task conflict can manifest in subgroup division, activate task-related faultlines, and intensify relationship conflict in sport organizations. Specifically, we show that social identification targets (i.e., workgroup identity) will result from intense task conflict at the group level that is persistent over time.[80_TD$IF] These workgroup identity targets will then lead to individual level relationship

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

3

conflict within the sport organization. Following the tenets of self-categorization theory, we further posit that these associations are moderated by subgroup (task-related) faultlines in that activated negative faultlines as a result of longlasting intense task conflict will influence the degree to which workgroup identity targets are associated with individual relationship conflict. [81_TD$IF]2. Relationship conflict Relationship conflict represents interpersonal incompatibilities that are emotionally laden (Jehn, 1995, 1997). As such, relationship conflict includes such pejorative outcomes as tension, personal friction, and personality clashes among team members (Jehn, 1995, 1997). However, recent theorizing suggests a shift in how relationship conflict is conceptualized (Bendersky et al., 2014), with a more concerted focus on the role that unresolved or emotionally laden task conflicts play in triggering relationship conflict (Curseu, Boros, & Oerlemans, 2012; de Wit, Jehn, & Scheepers, 2013; Kerwin & Doherty, 2012; Kerwin et al., 2011; Pluut & Curseu, 2012; Rispens, 2012). As an example, Kerwin et al. (2011) outlined the predominance of intense task conflict developing into relationship conflict in nonprofit boards, which is a direct function of diverse priorities. The direct association between intense, long-lasting conflict and relationship conflict is illustrated as a partially mediated association in Fig. 1. [82_TD$IF]2.1. Conflict triggering process Our main thesis is that certain factors that contribute to task-based conflict leading to relationship conflict are best explained by social identity theory. The tenets of the theory stipulate that individuals self-categorize as part of a larger group, and [83_TD$IF]group formation also occurs organically as a result of close working relationships (Tajel & Turner, 1979). The latter point is especially germane to the discussion of relation-based conflict since many work groups are not chosen, but rather are determined by the nature of the business and the structure of the individual unit. Accordingly, interpersonal conflict likely emanates from these closely working organizational members. However, a catalyst or triggering event must take place for conflict to emerge, which often occurs at the task-level and manifests at the relationship-level (Solansky, Singh, & Huang, 2014). This process is underpinned by the attributions assigned by the respective parties who are experiencing the actual conflict. It is important to emphasize that intense, long-lasting conflict is defined by individual perceptions of the conflict itself. For example, when a task-based issue is persistent over time (e.g., debate over budget allocations to various units within an athletics department), the attribution process is centered on a personal attack or an individual hidden agenda which may be perceived as intense (Jehn, 1997; Kerwin et al., 2011). In situations such as these, the perception of persistent, intense conflict may trigger relationship conflict among group members, which can impact the aggregate group (Curseu et al., 2012; de Wit et al., 2013; Kerwin & Doherty, 2012; Kerwin et al., 2011; Pluut & Curseu, 2012; Rispens, 2012). Reciprocally, while a triggering event is necessary for the conflict to arise, Jehn and Bendersky (2003) noted that certain conflict types tend to also trigger negative emotions among work group and other organizational members. In fact, conflict scholars [84_TD$IF]have observed a positive relationship between task conflicts in teams and negative emotions experienced by work team members (Bendersky et al., 2014; Jehn et al., 2008). Rispens (2012), however, countered these results by showing that when teams argue over task issues (e.g., definition of an athletic team’s policies regarding doping), the association between task conflict and relationship conflict was non-existent. The author noted that this result may be partially attributed to the decrease in negative emotions present in teams during important task conflicts. Thus, unpacking this association may be particularly relevant to various professional sport organizations where employees possess strong team and organizational identity (Swanson & Kent, 2015), which may develop into emotionally laden responses to disagreement. Collectively, these results point to the fundamental importance of social identity theory in the relationship conflict dynamic since many conflicts are emotionally charged among close working groups. Moreover, these results are especially important when considering that social identity theory is underpinned by positive emotional states and foundationally constructed on mutual trust and understanding among in-group members within sport organizations. Thus, when taskrelated disagreements take place, negative emotions may manifest. If negative emotions persist, the social identities of the work group members may ultimately lead to faultlines in group structure, which can lead to dysfunctional outcomes in sport organizations. Supporting the utility of the propositions presented in Fig. 1,Desivilya, Somech, and Lidgoster (2010) suggest that failure to understand the connection between identity and conflict in small groups can reduce the overall statistical power of conflict-related associations. [85_TD$IF]3. Social identity theory and identification Psychological group formation is a contributing factor to understanding how groups influence individuals (Tsui, Egan, & O’Reilly, 1992). The social identity approach of group formation defines the group in cognitive terms and “ . . . considers identification, or self-categorization, to be the mechanism of psychological group formation” (Hogg & Turner, 1985, p. 51). This approach enables individuals to make sense of their environment and also define their personal identity. For the most part, this is achieved through comparisons with how in-group and out-group members influence group functioning (Tajfel, 1969). For example, individuals may assess the presence of out-group members within their organization and adjust their

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

4

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

decision making to further enhance their status and role within their in-group. This causes separation between in-group and out-group members, and strengthens an individual’s identity with the in-group. Social group formation (e.g., family, religious groups) is also germane to the organizational group development discussion (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Turner, 1982). In particular, professional staff may identify with targets based on a variety of social categories or group attributes (Ashforth & Johnson, 2001; Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Hogg & Terry, 2000; Moreland, Levine, & McMinn, 2001). For example, a marketing manager within a large professional sports team might identify with a workgroup based on the social interactions with individuals within the department. This identification type is categorized by affiliations with coworkers, workgroups, and the organization, which are all potential targets for relational or collective identification (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Sluss & Ashforth, 2007; van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000). Under this categorization, three identification targets have been discussed: [86_TD$IF]coworker identity, workgroup identity, and organizational identity. First, coworker identity (i.e., individual connections) occurs when individuals define themselves according to comparisons with organizational members. For example, a new hire may feel a strong affiliation with a senior staff member through a mentor–mentee relationship. As a result, this new hire may identify with that individual rather than a workgroup or the organization as a whole. Second, workgroup identity is a relational association with groups working together on organizational tasks. For example, in nonprofit sport organizations, individuals who sit on the board of directors may identify with their board as a group rather than the organization as a whole. Third, organizational identity is a collective orientation where individuals define themselves in terms of their overall connection to the organization. This identification type is linked to social identity theory because the focus of self-definition results in comparisons to others,[87_TD$IF] subsequently leading to the depersonalization of individuals (Hogg & Terry, 2000) to demonstrate more favorable comparisons with organizational others. It is, therefore, reasonable to surmise that when organizational identification is high, individuals are more aware of the commonalities between themselves and other organizational members (Brickson, 2000). While these identity targets are presented as separate, they are likely not mutually exclusive and are context dependent. Van Dick, van Knippenberg, Kerschreiter, Hertel, and Wieseke (2008) noted that despite the idea that workgroup and organizational identification are assumed to be positively correlated,[8_TD$IF] both forms may be independent and possess distinct antecedents. Since workgroup identity tends to be higher than organizational identity (Moreland & Levine, 2001; van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000), both identification types should be treated as distinct concepts with unique associations between both attitudes and behaviors (van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000; van Dick, Wagner, Stellmacher, & Christ, 2004). This may be particularly true in sport organizations where specific groups (e.g., departments, committee) interact closely for intense periods of time. Unfortunately, within sport, power patterns arise where group dynamics between paid staff and volunteer boards of directors may be strained (Hoye & Doherty, 2011; Schoenberg, Cuskelly, & Auld, 2016), and thus the development of a common organizational identity may not be readily attained. Further, Padilla and Perez (2003) noted that identification may be connected to the perception of conflict within groups. While this prior work is important to the conflict discussion, frameworks examining the unique influence of specific social identification targets (e.g., workgroup) are relatively absent from the literature. Further, certain contexts (e.g., nonprofit boards of directors or committee structures associated with hosting major games) operate in environments where workgroup identity is far more salient than other identity targets. Thus, the propositions in the current article are focused on the development and outcomes of workgroup identity as a mediating factor to the conflict triggering process. [89_TD$IF]4. The connection between social identity and intragroup conflict Intense task conflict can lead to employee withdrawal (Kerwin et al., 2011). Specifically, Kerwin et al. (2011) found that intense conflict in sport boards was a direct result of diverse priorities, which were linked to personal connections to sport, and resulted in frustration, stress, and withdrawal. Withdrawal can come in many forms, including a disconnect from decision making to withdrawal from the board itself (Kerwin et al., 2011). However, when looking at social identity theory, withdrawal can be defined from a collective orientation perspective where individuals define themselves in terms of their overall connection to the organization. Subsequently, individuals may begin to personalize their social identity orientation (Hogg & Terry, 2000), which can enable the presence of affective (and potentially unfavorable) comparisons with organizational others. It is, therefore, reasonable to surmise that when task conflict is intense and persistent over time (i.e., long-lasting[90_TD$IF]), individuals become more aware of the commonalities and differences between themselves and other organizational group members. This awareness of similarities and differences enhances identity formation and attachment as individuals may begin to disassociate themselves from certain “others” so as to maintain a psychological distance (Weiss & Lang, 2012, p. 154). The attachment that comes with identity formation (and subsequent distancing from “others”) resulting from conflict may be particularly relevant for sport employees for two reasons: (a) sport employees possess a strong desire to work in the sport industry and thus are emotionally engaged in the context; and (b) power relations within sport tend to be heightened given the lack of policy around the authoritative decision making roles of the dual leadership structure (e.g., executive director and board president; see Schoenberg et al., 2016). Both conditions within the sport context emphasize the applicability of social identity theory and highlight the likelihood of intense conflict leading to the formation of identity targets. Proposition 1A. The presence of intense, long-lasting task conflict will lead to personalized identity formation.

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

5

In cases where a number of individuals are involved in a task disagreement and the persistent task conflict becomes intense, workgroup identity may develop as relational associations with specific groups. This formation may be a result of individuals looking for connections with those who form a similar perspective/goal orientation in reference to the task conflict. For example, and as a result of the polarized dual leadership structure previously outlined, during an intense disagreement between board of directors and executive staff regarding the allocation of athlete travel funds, individuals may gravitate toward the goals and orientation of their group identity (e.g., board of directors) in order to gain collective support for their point of view. Proposition 1B. The presence of intense, long-lasting task conflict will increase the formation of workgroup identity targets. Workgroup identification is associated with groups of similar others working together on organizational tasks (Cooper & Thatcher, 2010); in the case of Proposition 1B, sitting on the same side of the task conflict. Once individuals self-categorize [91_TD$IF] with a group, they will feel more compatible with the members of that group (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). In doing so, they will have most likely completed the process of depersonalization. Depersonalization is not a loss of self or individualization; rather, it is the embrace and manifestation of group prescriptions (Hogg & Terry, 2000). A subsequent alignment of the employee’s attitudes towards and understanding of organizational tasks with those of the workgroup would be expected. As such, workgroup identity will be associated with in-group membership and assumed compatibility amongst in-group members would be adopted. This particular depersonalization was highlighted by Swanson and Kent (2015), who noted distinctions between team and organizational identity that provide support for a unique form of depersonalization that occurs in sport. This idea of identity targets aligns with [92_TD$IF]social exchange theory (Emerson, 1976) because the focus is on creating and sustaining reciprocal relationships by adopting a cost-benefit analysis. Blau (1964) noted that social behavior is the result of an exchange where individuals weigh certain costs over perceived benefits. Therefore, individuals involved in intense longlasting conflict may form a workgroup identity. Thus, a cost-benefit analysis is focused on avoidance of confrontation and disagreement with in-group member and maintaining a strong relationship with in-group members. The attributes perceived to best represent the workgroup identity that has formed, as a result of the intense long-lasting conflict, will simultaneously distance workgroup members from out-group members (Hogg & Terry, 2000). This distancing that occurs as a result of the cost-benefit analysis will likely increase relationship conflict with out-group members as emotionally-laden and tension filled interpersonal incompatibilities (Jehn, 1995, 1997) will be exposed through individualized and workgroup dynamics. For example, individuals who sit on the same side of an intense, long-lasting task disagreement will likely form a sense of compatibility with one another. This sense of compatibility creates a strong in-group bond that leads to emotional reactions to interactions with those members who sit on the other side of the disagreement (e.g., out-group members). Thus, confrontation with out-group members is inevitable given the perceived incompatibilities among members and the need to maintain workgroup cohesion with compatible in-group members is emphasized (Cross, Gore, & Morris, 2003). Therefore, the mediating role of workgroup identity on the task conflict to relationship conflict association is proposed. Proposition 2. The presence of a workgroup identity as a result of intense, long-lasting task conflict will lead to relationship conflict with out-group members. [93_TD$IF]5. The role of group faultlines Group faultlines are alignments of multiple diversity attributes in groups (e.g., age, gender, and expertise) that result in instability within teams (sub group formation; Thatcher & Patel, 2012). It is important to note that both positive and negative faultlines exist within organizations (Chung, Liao, Jackson, Subramony, Colakoglu, & Jiang, 2015). Whether a positive or negative faultline manifests itself is typically associated with the cultural norms around communication and management across faultlines. Moreover, the process of faultline contagion can occur when goals or priorities do not align between subgroups, and the misalignment goes largely unmanaged. In these cases, subgroup faultlines are then activated and conflict across faultlines takes place (Thatcher & Patel, 2012; van der Kamp, Tjemkes, & Jehn, 2015). Subgroups are likely present among diverse populations, and such subgroups can be the result of both surface- and deeplevel differences (Cunningham, 2007). As a result, faultlines form with subgroups, which result from the categorization process in which biases and stereotypes might be used to favorably perceive subgroup similarities or enhance dissimilarity, subsequently hindering group performance and effectiveness (Cunningham, 2007, 2015). Given the inevitable formation of groups within sport organizations (e.g., departments, board versus employees, athletes versus non-athletes), it is likely that most employees will encounter conflict between multiple identity targets, forcing them to opt for one identity over another. This is particularly salient in the sport literature where a focus on group faultlines among diverse populations is present. For example, there is considerable research and concern with racial and gender diversity and inclusion among sport leaders (Acosta & Carpenter, 2014; Lapchick, 2013), where perceived differences among supervisors and subordinates, or leaders/ coaches and employees/players is acknowledged. Likewise, the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons is of upmost importance regarding sexual orientation diversity (Cunningham, 2011), particularly in the hypermasculinized, homophobic, and misogynistic world of sport (Anderson, 2010). Within sport, faultlines are the basis for development of out-groups with whom former in-group members no longer identify. Thus, highlighting the ability to self-

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

6

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

categorize and align with members of different identities can complicate group faultlines and potentially heighten conflict in sport. Randel (2002) suggested the salience of one’s identity could moderate workgroup conflict when clear faultlines exist. This is especially true when employees possess a workgroup identity, and in-group/out-group members are clearly defined. In combination with the aforementioned diversity influences, the presence of team and organizational identity targets in the professional sport context (Swanson & Kent, 2015; Todd & Kent, 2009) may provide a unique context for these associations to arise. Essentially, group faultlines are hypothetical dividing lines that may split a group into subgroups based on one or more attributes (Lau & Murnighan, 1998). In the case of intense, long-lasting task conflict, the conflict itself may activate a faultline where individuals feel they must join a group or “take a side” within the conflict debate. As such, long-lasting task conflict may result in faultline creation (i.e., task-related faultlines; Chung et al., 2015). When faultlines are created based on intense, long-lasting task conflict, the faultline may be as strong, and thus provide an opportunity for the larger organization to “crack” (Lau & Murnighan, 1998). As a result, the faultline then becomes a partial mediator to the task conflict and workgroup identity formation. Given that many sport teams and administrators operate under an organizational hierarchy, extant faultlines among upper management have the potential to seep into middle and lower management, as well as among operational employees, manifesting in their compulsion to self-servingly choose an organization or workgroup identity. As noted by Lau and Murnighan (1998), the formation of negative faultlines is precluded by the need for a conflict to galvanize individuals into subgroup (workgroup identity) formation. Thus, we propose that intense, long-lasting task conflict has the potential for this galvanization. Proposition 3A. Intense, long-lasting task conflict will result in the creation of negative task-faultlines surrounding the task conflict. Proposition 3B. Task-faultlines resulting from intense, long-lasting task conflict will lead to workgroup identity formation. Further, we propose that the effect of workgroup identity on relationship and status conflict is moderated by the presence of negative task-related faultlines. The relevance to the current manuscript is that social identity can result in relational conflict, which is moderated by an identity threat. Defined as “ . . . challenges to the value or distinctness of group identity” (van Knippenberg, De Dreu, & Homan, 2004, p. 1015), identity threats have specific implications when multiple identity groups exist in the workplace. Threats to an identity can influence the association between identities and relational conflict, as positive associations may be heightened when conflicting subgroup identities are present (van Knippenberg et al., 2004). For example, within a sales department of a large intercollegiate athletics department, there may be a number of individuals selling tickets for two separate events (e.g., basketball and American soccer). Subgroups may form within the department based on identification with each event. Despite similarities in being coworkers in the same sales department and even having the same goal of selling tickets, a perceived dissimilarity might cause disruptive identification to emerge among coworkers simply because of the sport for which they sell tickets. According to self-categorization, this would result in heightened allegiance to the subgroup during task-based decisions. Further, struggles for power, status, and (in) compatibility between subgroups during sales meetings and decision-making would be strengthened. The moderating role of faultlines among subgroup members buttresses Cunningham’s (2007) work regarding relational demography and perceived/actual diversity differences, such that perceived deep-level dissimilarity manifests among individuals in a way to hinder workgroup effectiveness and individual commitment (Cunningham, 2015). As such, the proposed positive association between workgroup identity and relation-based conflict would be intensified or increase in the presence of these faultlines. In sum, with the presence of negative task-related faultlines the allegiance to the in-group may foster tension between groups labelled as “out-group” members, thus strengthening the link to relationship and status conflict. Proposition 3C. Negative task-related faultlines will moderate the association between workgroup identity and relationship conflict in that the association will be stronger when negative task-related faultlines are present. [94_TD$IF]6. Discussion Since relationship conflict is regarded as one of the most problematic and underdeveloped of the intragroup conflict constructs, focusing on the factors that influence the presence of relationship conflict is important for theory extension. We suggest that intense, long-lasting task conflict can result in relationship conflict if the original task conflict goes unmanaged. We also point to the idea that intense, long-lasting conflict is defined based on the perceptions of each individual within the conflict process. Thus, we posit that social identity plays a significant role in the conflict triggering process. In addition, attention paid to the antecedent conditions of relationship conflict is warranted given the negative influence of relationship conflict in sport organization boards (see Hamm-Kerwin & Doherty, 2010; Kerwin et al., 2011). We contribute to the dissection of the conflict triggering process, as suggested by Kerwin and Doherty (2012), and provides a foundation for exploring the theoretical processes involved in the development of relational-based conflicts in sport organizations. The propositions [95_TD$IF]illustrated in Fig. 1 make two specific contributions to organizational behavior theory in the field of sport management. First, relationship conflict has been categorized as dysfunctional for group functioning within sport boards (Kerwin et al., 2011), and thus requires particular attention and intervention in all sport industry sectors. Therefore,

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

7

focusing on the antecedent factors of relationship conflict and the conflict triggering process more specifically will assist sport management theorists when unpacking factors leading to relationship-based disagreement. Further, scrutinizing the task conflict to relationship conflict association specifically contributes to theoretical debate regarding the utility of the interactionist perspective and cognitive processing perspective in intragroup conflict research (see De Dreu & Weingart, 2003; Rispens, 2014). Second, incorporating social identity theory into a multi-dimensional view of conflict adds insight into how the perceptions of ‘self’ and ‘others’ contribute to intragroup conflict. Defining multiple subgroup identities, as a component of group faultlines, shows the relative influence of these faultlines on the presence of conflict (Thatcher & Patel, 2014). Discussing these associations conceptually further supports empirical examinations of social identity and its influence on other group processes (e.g., cohesion, trust, etc.) in sport. Specifically, for sport employees who possess heightened levels of social identity (Swanson & Kent, 2015; Todd & Kent, 2009) and thus stronger formations of in-group and out-group processes, levels of trust and cohesion may moderate these associations. The following sections outline the extant literature related to conflict, social identity, and faultlines, where propositions from the model are presented and supported. [96_TD$IF]6.1. Contributions to scholarship In terms of identity targets and faultlines, we advance theoretical understanding of group functioning in sport organizations, specifically focusing on the conflict triggering process. Intuitively, we understand that employees and volunteers are the cornerstones of any sport organization. Individual self-categorization and group and subgroup formation impact communication, decision making, information sharing and processing, as well as interaction and cooperation (van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Furthermore, the presence of subgroups enhances the potential for faultlines between group members (Bezrukova et al., 2007; Lau & Murnighan, 2005; Li & Hambrick, 2005). We, therefore, suggest that faultlines provide a mediating and moderating role in the connection between conflict types, and subsequently conflict and identity; a condition that will enrich knowledge regarding the social identity factors influencing interpersonal conflict. In the proposed model, we recognize the presence of relationship conflict as an outcome of intense, long-lasting task conflict,[97_TD$IF] and social identification within a group. Specifically, individual perceptions of task conflict can contribute to positive affect towards in-group members and aversion to out-group members, which impact group-level production and selfidentification. Therefore, using individual perceptions when assessing conflict should illuminate under what circumstances the propositions hold and when they do not. This focus will provide further support for the contribution and applicability of social identity theory when examining conflict within sport organizations. [98_TD$IF]6.2. Applied implications As noted by Corley and Gioia (2011), establishing “ . . . relevance to practice [is] a prominent dimension of theoretical contribution” (p. 20). Therefore, sport organization leaders could use the proposed model to identify the presence of different forms of conflict and highlight the need to manage intense, long-lasting task conflict and interpersonal relations. Thus, constructing methods to assess social identity in an organization at various points during the organization’s lifecycle could lead to effective management of the conflict triggering process. It is recognized that removal of task conflict within the workplace may be detrimental to diverse thinking, may inadvertently promote homogenous environments, and may be impossible during intense periods of work (e.g., preparing to host an international event). What we propose here is that the presence of long-lasting task conflict, at the very least, be recognized and the social identity targets (or task-related faultlines) within an organization be understood by leaders. Long-lasting disagreement or conflict should never be ignored, and the management of faultlines should be addressed. Once these propositions are tested, an examination of the group norms that result from these associations is recommended by both practitioners and scholars. Further, upon confirmation of the proposed model, organizations prone to subgroup formation (e.g., paid staff and boards of directors; small committee work groups; large sport organizations with multiple departments) may realize the value of managing subgroup identities. Leaders could reflect on the power of social identities when attempting to control intense conflict and develop communication strategies that bridge faultlines and conflicting subgroup identities. In particular, it is important to note that the propositions presented here are intended to manage long-lasting conflict and reduce dysfunctional forms of conflict. However, the strength of the model may lie in identifying how each of the proposed associations will impact subsequent conflict norms and group functioning. Thus, it is important to recognize and assess the associations put forth here, yet also explore the future implications on research and management practices regarding the management of task-based conflicts in sport. [9_TD$IF]716.3. Future research directions To demonstrate the utility of the proposed model, several steps must be undertaken. First, in order to operationalize the perception of intense long-lasting task conflict in sport organizations, we believe qualitative exploration of the nature of this construct in nonprofit and for-profit sport contexts is warranted. Specifically, an in-depth analysis of how this construct is defined by employees and board members will provide a more refined picture of this factor for the purpose of item generation within a quantitative analysis. Second, once intense long-lasting conflicts are defined, a quantitative examining of the pathways outlined in Fig. 1 should be empirically tested to gain an initial understanding of the fit and parameter matrices

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

8

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

to determine the casual implications of the model paths. It is important to test the model in contexts where long-lasting task conflicts may persist and faultlines are present. Specifically, permanent nonprofit sport governing bodies (e.g., US Lacrosse, Basketball Canada) that possess a board of directors who operate alongside paid staff members would be appropriate for analysis. Third, following an assessment of model fit, follow-up qualitative analysis with particular cases (e.g., those organizations where individuals have rated relatively high or low intense, long-lasting conflict) may help further refine the model as it relates to the sport organization context. Fourth, faultlines and conflicting subgroup identity are merely one component under the self-categorization umbrella. Factors such as intergroup biases and subgroup cohesion may play a moderating role in the conflict triggering process. However, based on previous research by van Knippenberg et al. (2004), threats to identity appear to be most meaningful when examining the conflict triggering process. Finally, critical to better understanding the interrelatedness of task-based conflict, relation-based conflict, and subsequent social identity is examining the nature of such conflict where the intensity and duration of the conflict are at the forefront. Thus, simultaneous qualitative exploration of these constructs in the sport context is recommended. Following verification of the proposed model, further propositions and empirical examination are recommended to highlight the complexity of these associations within the sport management context. References Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2014). Women in intercollegiate sport: A longitudinal, national study – thirty-seven year update – 1977-2014. Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn College Unpublished manuscript. Anderson, E. (2010). Sport, theory, and social problems: A critical introduction. New York: Routledge. Ashforth, B. E., & Johnson, S. A. (2001). Which hat to wear? The relative salience of multiple identities in organizational contexts. In M. A. Hogg, & D. J. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts (pp. 31–48).Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39. Bendersky, C., Bear, J., Behfar, K., Weingart, L. R., Todorova, G., & Jehn, K. A. (2014). Identifying gaps between the conceptualization of conflict and its measurement. In O. B. Ayoko, N. M. Ashkanasy, & K. A. Jehn (Eds.), Handbook of conflict management (pp. 79–89).Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Bezrukova, K., Thatcher, S. M. B., & Jehn, K. A. (2007). Group heterogeneity and faultlines: Comparing alignment and dispersion theories of group composition. In K. J. Behfar, & L. L. Thompson (Eds.), Conflict in organizational groups: New directions in theory and practice (pp. 57–92).Evanston, IL: The Northwestern University Press. Bezrukova, K., Thatcher, S., Jehn, K. A., & Spell, C. S. (2012). The effects of alignments: Examining group faultlines, organizational cultures, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 77–92. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this we? Levels of collective identity and self-representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83– 93. Brickson, S. (2000). The impact of identity orientation on individual and organizational outcomes in demographically diverse settings. Academy of Management Review, 25, 82–101. Chung, Y., Liao, H., Jackson, S. E., Subramony, M., Colakoglu, S., & Jiang, Y. (2015). Cracking but not breaking: Joint effects of faultline strength and diversity climate on loyal behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1495–1515. Cooper, D., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2010). Identification in organizations: The role of self-concept orientations and identification motives. Academy of Management Review, 35, 516–538. Corley, K., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36, 12– 32. Cross, S. E., Gore, J. S., & Morris, M. L. (2003). The relational-interdependent self-construal, self-concept consistency: and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 933–944. Curseu, P., Boros, S., & Oerlemans, L. (2012). Task and relationship conflict in short-term and long-term groups: The critical role of emotion regulation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 23(1), 97–107. Cunningham, G. B. (2007). Perceptions as reality: The influence of actual and perceived demographic dissimilarity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(1), 79–89. Cunningham, G. B. (2011). The LGBT advantage: Examining the relationship among sexual orientation diversity, diversity strategy, and performance. Sport Management Review, 14, 453–461. Cunningham, G. B. (2015). Diversity and inclusion in sport organizations, 3rd ed. Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb-Hathaway. 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, 28–48. Dovidio, J. F., Saguy, T., & Shnabel, N. (2009). Cooperation and conflict within groups: Bridging intragroup and intergroup processes. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 429–449. 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., Jehn, K., & Scheepers, D. (2013). Task conflict, information processing, and decision-making: The damaging effect of relationship conflict. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(2), 177–189. Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335–362. Hamm-Kerwin, S., & Doherty, A. (2010). Intragroup conflict in nonprofit sport boards. Journal of Sport Management, 24(3), 245–271. Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25, 121–140. Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1985). Interpersonal attraction: social identification and psychological group formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 51–66. Hoye, R., & Doherty, A. (2011). Nonprofit sport board performance: A review and directions for future research. Journal of Sport Management, 25, 272–285. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multi-method 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., Greer, L., Levine, S., & Szulanski, G. (2008). The effects of conflict types, dimensions, and emergent states on group outcomes. Group Decision and Negotiation, 17, 465–495. Kerwin, S. (2013). Exploring organizational identity and interpersonal conflict in sport organizations. Journal of Applied Sport Management, 5, 47–69. Kerwin, S., & Doherty, A. (2012). An investigation of the conflict triggering process in intercollegiate athletic departments. Journal of Sport Management, 26, 224–236.

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003

G Model SMR 394 No. of Pages 9

S. Kerwin et al. / Sport Management Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

9

Kerwin, S., Doherty, A., & Harman, A. (2011). It’s not conflict, it’s differences of opinion: An in-depth examination of conflict in nonprofit sport boards. Small Group Research, 42, 562–594. Kerwin, S., MacLean, J., & Bell-Laroche, D. (2014). The mediating influence of management by values in nonprofit sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 28, 646–656. Korsgaard, M. A., Ployhart, R. E., & Ulrich, M. D. (2014). The emergence of intragroup conflict: Variations in conflict configurations. In O. B. Ayoko, N. M. Ashkanasy, & K. A. Jehn (Eds.), Handbook of conflict management research (pp. 51–65).Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Lapchick, R. (2013). 2013 racial and gender report card: Think beyond the competition. The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport. . Available at http://nebula. wsimg.com/728474de65f7d28b196a0fbb47c05a91?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&disposition=0&alloworigin=1. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23, 325–340. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (2005). Interactions within groups and subgroups: The dynamic effects of demographic faultlines. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 645–659. Lawrence, B. S., & Zyphur, M. J. (2011). Identifying organizational faultlines with latent class cluster analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 32–57. Li, J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Factional groups: A new vantage on demographic faultlines, conflict, and disintegration in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 794–813. Mooney, A. C., Holahan, P. J., & Amason, A. C. (2007). Don’t take it personally: Exploring cognitive conflict as a mediator of affective conflict. Journal of Management Studies, 44, 733–758. Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (2001). Socialization in organizations and workgroups. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Theory and research (pp. 69–112). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Moreland, R. L., Levine, J. M., & McMinn, J. G. (2001). Self-categorization and work group socialization. In M. Hogg, & D. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts (pp. 87–100). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. Padilla, A. M., & Perez, W. (2003). Acculturation, social identity, and social cognition: A new perspective. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25, 35–55. Pluut, H., & Curseu, P. (2012). Perceptions of intragroup conflict: The effect of coping strategies on conflict transformation and escalation. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(4), 412–425. Randel, A. E. (2002). Identity salience: A moderator of the relationship between group gender composition and work group conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 749–766. Ren, H., & Gray, B. (2009). Repairing relationship conflict: How violation types and culture influence the effectiveness of restoration rituals. Academy of Management Review, 34, 105–126. Rispens, S. (2012). The influence of conflict issue importance on the co-occurrence of task and relationship conflict in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 349–367. Rispens, S. (2014). Beneficial and detrimental effects of conflict. In O. B. Ayoko, N. M. Ashkanasy, & K. A. Jehn (Eds.), Handbook of conflict management (pp. 19– 31).Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Schoenberg, G., Cuskelly, G., & Auld, C. (2016). The role of intragroup dynamics in non-profit governance models: A systematic quantitative literature review. Managing Sport and Leisure, 21, 1–22. Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2007). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships. Academy of Management Review, 32, 9–32. Solansky, S. T., Singh, B., & Huang, S. (2014). Individual perceptions of task conflict and relationship conflict. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 7, 83–98. Swanson, S., & Kent, A. (2015). Fandom in the workplace: Multi-target identification in professional team sports. Journal of Sport Management, 29, 461–477. Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive aspects of prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 79–97. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 33(47), 74–89. Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2014). Understanding the messy relationship between faultlines and conflict. In O. B. Ayoko, N. M. Ashkanasy, & K. A. Jehn (Eds.), Handbook of conflict management (pp. 403–425).Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Todd, S., & Kent, A. (2009). A social identity perspective on the job attitudes of employees in sport. Management Decision, 47(1), 173–190. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549–579. Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. van der Kamp, M., Tjemkes, B. V., & Jehn, K. A. (2015). Faultline deactivation: Dealing with activated faultlines and conflicts in global teams. In J. L. Wildman, & R. L. Griffith (Eds.), Leading global teams (pp. 269–293).New York: Springer. van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J., & Christ, O. (2004). The utility of a broader conceptualization of organizational identification: Which aspects really matter? Journal of Organizational and Occupational Psychology, 77, 171–191. van Dick, R., van Knippenberg, D., Kerschreiter, R., Hertel, G., & Wieseke, J. (2008). Interactive effects of work group and organizational identification on job satisfaction and extra-role behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 388–399. van Knippenberg, D., & van Schie, E. C. M. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 137–147. van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541. van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022. van Knippenberg, D., Dawson, J. F., West, M. A., & Homan, A. C. (2011). Diversity faultlines, shared objectives, and top management team performance. Human Relations, 64, 306–336. Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press. Weiss, D., & Lang, F. R. (2012). They are old but I feel younger: Age-group dissociation as a self-protective strategy in old age. Psychology and aging, 27(1), 153– 163. Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In B. M. Staw, & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: (Vol. 20. pp. 77–140).Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Please cite this article in press as: S. Kerwin, et al., When faultlines are created: Exploring the conflict triggering process in sport, Sport Management Review (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.10.003