CONFLICT AND COMMUNICATION AMONG ENGINEERS

LIST OF TABLESTable 2.1 The consequences of unresolved task conflict and relationship . 27Table 2.2 Different categories of diversity . 34Table 2.3The relationship between Diversity and Conflict . 46Table 2.4 Trend of cross-cultural needed ability . 50Table 3.1 Stages of selecting a proper sample . 68Table 4.1 CQ Rotated Factor Matrix . 80Table 4.2 Dependent variable’s Rotated Factor Matrix . 81Table 4.3 Correlations (Pearson) . 84Table 4.4 Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showing the moderating effect of culturaldiversity. 88Table 4.5 Slope Test for the Moderating effect of cultural diversity on the relationshipbetween CQ-1 and communication satisfaction . 90Table 4.6 Slope Test for the Moderating effect of cultural diversity on the relationshipbetween CQ-1 and relationship conflict . 91Table 4.7 Result Summary. 93LIST OF FIGURESFigure 2.1 The Cultural Intelligence Concept.52Figure 2.2 The proposed model for the current thesis.62Figure 4.1 Moderating effect of cultural diversity on the relationship between CQ-1 andcommunication satisfaction.89Figure 4.2 Moderating effect of cultural diversity on the relationship between CQ-1 andrelationship conflict.91Figure 5.1 The supported hypotheses.,.10110

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION1.1 IntroductionThe growth of multinational engineering organizations is not a new concern. One of themain goals of this growth of multinational firms is utilizing the best expertise or sharingimportant resources. Therefore, the increasing trend of workforce cultural diversity isaffecting individual and organizational psychological outcomes. Managing interpersonalinteractions and showing proper behaviours in multicultural environments is a necessary partof today’s organizational life. This study aims to examine the possible effects of interculturalcompetencies on individuals’ interpersonal interactions.This chapter provides the summary of the thesis. After the introduction section (1.1),section 1.2 describes the background of the research. Section 1.3 focuses on the significanceof the research area and section 1.4 introduces the research problems. In addition, thecontribution of the research to the existing theory is discussed in section 1.4.1. An overviewof the research methodology and a brief outline of the study are mentioned in sections 1.5 and1.6 respectively. Key assumptions and delimitations are also stated in section 1.7.1.2 Background of the ResearchThe level of demographic diversity in organizational groups is increasing. Newbusiness trends, globalization and movement of the workforce are the most important reasonsfor this increasing level of diversity(Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Engineeringcompanies are no exception. Movement of the workforce, growth of globalized engineeringorganizations, mergers, acquisitions, establishing international standardization organizationsand utilizing shared resources are some of the key reasons for this increasing trend ofworkforce diversity in engineering organizations(Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007).1.2.1 Engineering Organizations: Highly Multicultural WorkplacesLike countries and organizations, occupations have also their own culture (Van Maanen& Barley, 1984). Some research suggests that engineers believe that they belong to a distinctculture (Florman, 1987; Kunda, 1992; McIlwee & Robinson, 1992). McIlwee and Robinson(1992) state that based on this culture, engineers believe that the organizational power of11

companies is based on engineering success. Research among engineering scholars suggestedthat the engineering culture might cause barriers for the collaboration process of workgroups(Ingram & Parker, 2002). Organizations choose engineers for special projects based on theirtechnical competence (Perlow & Bailyn, 1997), therefore, the reward systems for engineersare normally based on individual output rather than group work (Ross, 2000). On the onehand, these special characteristics of engineering occupation like weak group work (Ross,2000), or weak collaboration (Ingram & Parker, 2002) call for more research on interpersonalinteraction among engineers. On the other hand, research shows that the trend ofdemographic diversity among organizational groups has increased(Jackson, Joshi, & Erhardt,2003; Williams & O'Reilly, 1998). Mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures affect thisincreasing diversity in workgroups (Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Cho (2011) discussedthat the trend towards workplace diversity in the United States’ engineering and constructionorganizations is increasing very rapidly. This research demonstrated that in scientific andengineering occupations, only 73 per cent of the whole population are white employees andthe rest are from different ethnicities(Cho, 2011). This research states that one reason behindthis demographic diversity is the need for technical skills, various thoughts and perspectives.The need to share knowledge and expertise is increasing the level of workforcediversity in an engineering context. Globalisation and competitiveness of engineeringorganizations require a diverse workforce to cope with technological and market changes(Schäfer, 2006). Jarvenpaa and Keating (2011) stated that complex engineering services havebecome very diverse because of globalization and the distribution of engineering teams. Thislongitudinal case study was undertaken among cross-cultural teams in United States andRomania to examine the importance of coordination of knowledge in diverse teams(Jarvenpaa & Keating, 2011). The research emphasised the importance of cross-culturalcommunication, because success of a diverse team relies on strong communication amongmembers.Demographic diversity is very problematic among engineering and constructionorganizations(Cho, 2011). Many expatriates fail to work successfully in their new culturalcontext, which means that organizations face the cost of replacement of the unsuccessfulexpatriate worker, the lost opportunities and the damaged relationship(Johnson, Lenartowicz,& Apud, 2006). It is not just expatriates that have unsuccessful experiences interacting withco-workers from other countries. Many managers face negative experiences by choosing a12

foreign business partner, managing a merger, acquisition or joint venture(Johnson, et al.,2006). Due to the culture of engineering organizations as described above, and the increasingtrend towards cultural diversity among the engineering workforce, it is suitable to selectengineering companies as the sample for this thesis.1.2.2 Diversity and ConflictOne of the most contentious types of demographic diversity is cultural diversity (Blau,1977). The differences between social cultures are one of the most common causes ofinterpersonal conflicts (Hofstede, 1980, 2001; Hofstede, Pedersen, & Hofstede, 2002). First,research shows that when diversity is about group members’ differences in their goals andopinions, they perceive task conflict (Jehn, Northcraft, & Neale, 1999); however, when thedifference is about emotions, norms and values, people perceive relationship conflict (Jehn, etal., 1999). In daily interactions of co-workers, occurrences of interpersonal conflicts areinevitable. However; homogenous groups are reported to face less relationship conflict incomparison to heterogeneous groups(Jehn, et al., 1999; Pelled, 1996; Pelled, Eisenhardt, &Xin, 1999;Williams & O'Reilly, 1998). As a result, this thesis will examine whetherculturally diverse workplaces increase conflict at the level of the individual.Conflict is not a new phenomenon. Conflict, in general, can be defined as a clash,collision or struggle between people who have opposing interests, beliefs, values or goals(Thomas, 1992). When different parties come together, incompatible goals, objectives, sharedresources, exclusive behaviours and different preferences can damage their relationship.Studying the nature of conflict has been always the philosopher’s concern. The study ofconflict started centuries ago with Aristotle and Plato. They believed in the necessity ofharmony in society to dampen the negative outcomes of conflict (Rahim, 2001). The firstclassical conflict theories in the nineteenth century were proposed by Karl Marx. He believedthat social groups are not equal and this inequality of attributes, power differences or class isthe reason for conflict (Rahim, 2010). Deutsch (1990), by reviewing sixty years of conflictstudies, stated that the major theories of conflict were affected by early studies of socialpsychologists like Darwin, Freud and Marx. These scholars believed that conflict iscompetitive and destructive. Darwin believed that conflict was a competitive and negativewar between different parties who are struggling for more resources or even just existence(Darwin in Deutsch, 1990).13

After the First World War, a revolution occurred in social psychology. Hawthorne wasone of the first psychologists in the new era who tried to perform empirical research intointerpersonal conflict. Hawthorne looked at conflict as a consequence of human behaviour. Inhis view, conflict is just the outcome of daily interactions between people with differentbehaviours. Hawthorne mentioned that the best way to reduce the level of conflict inorganizations is training the employees and managers to understand the cause and nature ofconflict (Conbere, 2001). In the 1950s, at the beginning of the Cold War, many scientistsstudied the nature of conflict in order to ease friction in international communications andindustrial relations. The main goal was to investigate the reasons for war and to find effectivemethods to resolve international conflicts without violence. Researchers tried to understandthe role of national goals, religion, and other causes of conflict that start wars (Webel &Galtung, 2007). Later, studies of international conflict emerged in social science andorganizational studies. In the 1970s, the trend of conflict studies was focused on interorganizational conflicts, negotiations, mediation and social conflicts (Lewicki, Barry, &Saunders, 2007).Conflict has been variously defined as:-‘the process which begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or isabout to frustrate, some concern of his’ (Thomas, 1992, p.265);- ‘an interactive process manifested in incompatibility, disagreement, or dissonancewithin or between social entities’ (Rahim, 2001, p.18);- ‘mixtures of competitive and cooperative processes’ (Deutsch, 1990, p.237);- ‘a phenomenon that occurs between interdependent parties as they experiencenegative emotional reactions to perceived disagreements and interference with the attainmentof their goals’ (Barki&Hartwick, 2001, p.198);- ‘a particular kind of social interaction process or interaction relationship betweenparties who have mutually exclusive or incompatible values’ (Fink, 1968).This thesis uses the definition of conflict used by Rahim (2010), for defining conflict.Therefore, conflict is defined as the ‘perceived divergence of interests’ (Rahim, 2010, p.1).14

Rahim’s (2001) definition of conflict is appropriate because of its simple but holisticmeaning.1.2.3 Perspectives on ConflictConflict can be seen from various viewpoints. Authors like Schellenberg(1996) tried todescribe conflict through the lens of various theoretical approaches. Schellenberg(1996)stated that conflict could be studied through four different perspectives:trait theories, socialprocess theories, social structure theories and logic based theories. In the following sections,each of these approaches will be discussed.1.2.3.1 Trait TheoriesTrait theories are one of the major approaches to study the personality of individuals.This theory focuses on patterns of behaviours, emotions, habits and thoughts. According tothis theory, traits are not dynamic over time but are different among different individuals. Forexample, if a person is an introvert they will always be an introvert, but it does not mean thateveryone is an introvert. The important point is that this characteristic of being introvertedinfluences all of a person’s behaviours (Schellenberg, 1996). So, all behaviours are based onan individual’s personality. Schellenberg(1996) tried to describe interpersonal conflictthrough this theory. Schellenberg(1996) argued that different traits cause conflict, especiallywhen they clash. Conflict occurs based on the interactions between individuals with differentpersonalities, behaviours and emotions.1.2.3.2 Social Process TheoriesThe main goal of social process theory is to understand the process of socialization andhow the social constraints oblige individuals to commit to acts or neglect acts (Schellenberg,1996). In the process of social interactions, individuals learn some behaviour. Most of thebehaviours are learned from group members while socializing with them. The groupmember’s behaviour can be cooperative or competitive. Therefore, individuals can showcooperative or competitive behaviours based on their socialization process. When differentindividuals (from different social groups) communicate with each other, these differences intheir cooperative (or competitive) behaviour can cause interpersonal conflict.15

1.2.3.3 Social Structure TheoriesSocial structure theories focus on the socioeconomic structure of organizations. At themacro level, they refer to the patterns of relationships between social groups or the socialnetworks between individuals, groups or organizations (Schellenberg, 1996). At the microlevel, they are defined as the way that norms shape the behaviour of individuals in a socialsystem. These theories assert that, it is the social network that shapes the communicationbehaviours. Therefore, when different individuals from different social networks (who havelearned different norms) communicate, conflict is a consequence of different norms ofcommunication (Schellenberg, 1996).1.2.3.4 Logic Based TheoriesIn logic-based theories, like game theory, parties have to choose their actions withoutknowing about the other party’s preference (Schellenberg, 1996). If the players of the gameco-operate the result would be win-win for all of them. If the players of the game show noncooperative or competitive behaviours, the result will make one player the winner and theother player the loser. Schellenberg(1996) stated that conflict could be described through thelens of game theory. Like game theory, mathematics or logical steps can be used to describethe conflict situations. Parties in conflicting situations have different preferences and all ofthem want to be the winner. Although Schellenberg(1996) described conflict throughdifferent theories, all these theories show that the individual’s different behaviours causeinterpersonal conflict.As can be seen in all the above-mentioned theories, there is a certain differencebetween individuals that causes conflict. This difference can be the personality of individuals(Trait Theories), learnt cooperative or competitive behaviour from the group members (SocialProcess Theories), norms that shape the behaviour of individuals (Social Structure Theories)or the cooperative or competitive behaviours in interpersonal interactions (Logic BasedTheories). The important point is that individuals from different cultural backgroundsdefinitely have a different collection of norms and behaviours. Returning to the definition ofconflict as a ‘perceived divergence of interests’ (Rahim, 2010, p. 1), it really does not matterwhat the difference is. The important point is that there are some differences (in personalities,norms, behaviour, etc.) that individuals perceive as diverging from their interests. Thisperception is defined as the conflict between individuals.16

To sum up, different theories may define the causes of conflict from differentperspectives, but the results are not very different. It can be implied that this thesis looks atconflict through trait theory and the lens of social theory. Conflict can occur due to culturaldifferences. Individuals from different cultural backgrounds may have a different socialobligation in responding to a situation differently. Further, this thesis argues that the level ofconflict may be due to the individual trait of cultural competency to deal with the differences.1.2.4 Diversity and Communication SatisfactionResearch shows that interpersonal communication among more homogeneous groups ismore effective(Earley & Mosakowski, 2000). Ineffective communication among co-workerscauses frustration and dysfunctional relationships. Individuals in different cultures havedifferent communication norms, which makes interpersonal communication in diversesettings more complicated(Adair, 2003). Individuals’ perception of the

2.3.1 Functional Conflict 2.3.2 Dysfunctional Conflict 2.3.3 Task versus Relationship Conflict 2.4 CAUSES OF CONFLICT 2.5 INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION AND INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT 2.6 WORKPLACE DIVERSITY AND CONFLICT 2.6.1 Different Categories of Workplace Diversity 2.6.2 Cultural Diversity 2.6.3 Measuring Diversity