Understanding Antecedents to Conflict in Geographically Distributed Research and Development Teams

We investigate the antecedents of conflict on collocated as compared with geographically distributed teams. In our field study of 16 collocated and 20 geographically distributed research and development teams, we found little evidence that distributed teams have more conflict. However, we did find that distributed teams experienced more coordination problems and less healthy conflict handling norms which were, in turn, associated with more conflict. Contrary to our predictions, neither frequency of communication nor reliance on mediating technologies were related to increased affective or task conflict. Our findings suggest that the frequency of communication and the medium used may be less important than the content of the information that flows between group members and the group’s ability to speak openly and deal with conflict as it arises. 1 UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT IN GEOGRAPHICALLY DISTRIBUTED TEAMS Recent advances in telecommunication and information technologies offer new means by which globally distributed work can be carried out. Although an increasing number of organizations are relying on technology-enabled geographically distributed teams (McDonough et al. 2001), these teams present a challenge for leaders and team members. Distributed teams often suffer coordination problems (see Cramton 2001), crises of trust (Jarvenpaa and Leidner 1999), and unhealthy subgroup dynamics (Armstrong and Cole 2002). Conflict that is difficult to isolate and manage may also pose a particular challenge for distributed teams (see Mannix et al. 2002). Indeed, studies of geographically distributed teams report significant conflict between distant members (Armstrong and Cole 2002; Cramton 2001), although what contributes to high levels of conflict on distributed teams remains unclear. Our goal in the research we report here is to provide a better understanding of the antecedents that lead to conflict in distributed teams. We compare collocated with distributed teams to understand how the factors contributing to conflict and the way in which conflict might be handled differ on these teams. We argue that distance will not automatically produce more conflict, but that distance enables certain conditions that give rise to conflict if not managed effectively. Along with others, we differentiate affective (emotional) conflict from task conflict (e.g., Eisenhardt et al. 1997; Pelled 1996; Pelled and Adler 1994). Affective conflict refers to conflicts that are characterized by anger or hostility between group members. Task conflict refers to disagreements focused on work content. A third type of conflict, process conflict, has been differentiated from task and affective conflict (see Jehn 1997). In this paper, we do not examine process conflict because it was not well established nor were the measures well developed at the time of this study. Hinds & Mortensen/Conflict in Distributed Teams 416 2002 — Twenty-Third International Conference on Information Systems 2 GEOGRAPHIC DISTANCE When arguing that geographic distance will lead to more task and affective conflict, scholars have cited a number of reasons. One reason is that distributed teams are expected to exhibit more diversity which, in turn, results in more conflict. Extensive research on diversity has established that demographic, functional, and cognitive diversity lead to more conflict in teams (e.g., O’Reilly et al. 1997; Pelled 1996). Distance also impoverishes communication and impedes the development of close relationships (Athanasiou and Yoshioka 1973; Festinger et al. 1950). Thus, physical distance decreases closeness and affinity, both of which are inversely related to conflict. Another problem likely to coincide with physical distance is low mutual awareness among teammates (Dourish and Bellotti 1992; Dourish and Bly 1992; Fussell et al. 1998) which has been linked to groups’ abilities to successfully coordinate their work (Cannon-Bowers et al. 1993). Finally, when conflict does arise, distributed teams may find it more difficult to manage that conflict. In the study reported here, we examine diversity (cultural), amount of communication, coordination challenges, and conflict handling norms to determine the extent to which each contributes to conflict on distributed as compared with collocated teams.