Search results

PurposeThis paper aims to investigate the effects task conflict has on agreement seeking behavior and interpersonal conflict. In addition, it seeks to examine the moderating role of trust on the effects of agreement seeking behavior and interpersonal conflict on the styles of handing conflict, namely, avoidance, collaboration, and third party intervention.Design/methodology/approachUsing a structured survey instrument, this paper gathered data from 252 senior executives from Mainland China and analyzed these using the regression technique to see how interpersonal trust between executives moderates the relationship between conflict and conflict response mechanisms. The study also investigates the relationship between task and relationship conflict as well as agreement‐seeking behavior among Chinese executives in Mainland China.FindingsResults show that the presence of interpersonal trust among executives affects the conflict responses for the benefit of organization. The results show that task conflict in top management teams is positively related to relationship conflict and negatively related to agreement‐seeking behavior. The data support the view that intra‐group trust moderates the relationship between agreement‐seeking behavior and collaborating responses such that high‐trust groups will have greater collaboration than low‐trusting teams. Results also support that intra‐group trust moderates the relationship between agreement‐seeking behavior and third party responses such that high‐trust groups will have greater third‐party responses than low‐trusting teams.Research limitations/implicationsSelf‐report measures may have some inherent social desirability bias. Despite this potential weakness, this study examines Chinese executives and therefore provides insights into top management team literature.Practical implicationsThis study contributes to both practicing managers as well as to strategic management literature. This study suggests that administrators need to focus on interpersonal trust while dealing with the outcomes of task and relationship conflict.Originality/valueAlthough the study is related to Chinese executives, the findings from the study, that task conflict has its affect on interpersonal conflict and agreement‐seeking behavior, contribute to the strategic decision making literature.

PurposeThis paper elucidates the role of anger in error management (EM) and organizational learning behaviors. The study explores how anger can catalyze learning, emphasizing its strategic implications.Design/methodology/approachA double-layered moderated-mediated model was developed and tested using data from 744 Chinese CEOs. The psychometric properties of the survey instrument were rigorously examined through structural equation modeling, and hypotheses were tested using Hayes's PROCESS macros.FindingsThe findings reveal that anger is a precursor for recognizing the value of significant errors, leading to a positive association with learning behavior among top management team members. Additionally, the study uncovers a triple interaction effect of anger, EM culture and supply chain disruptions on the value of learning from errors. Extensive experience and positive grieving strengthen the relationship between recognizing value from errors and learning behavior.Originality/valueThis study uniquely integrates affect-cognitive theory and organizational learning theory, examining anger in EM and learning. The authors provide empirical evidence that anger can drive error value recognition and learning. The authors incorporate a more fine-grained approach to leadership when including executive anger as a trigger to learning behavior. Factors like experience and positive grieving are explored, deepening the understanding of emotions in learning. The authors consider both negative and positive emotions to contribute to the complexity of organizational learning.