The paper has two goals. First, to find out whether majority rule or a unanimous decision rule would facilitate more task conflict. Second, to develop several operational measures of task conflict. The study used an experimental design using 18 groups. The group discussions were tape recorded and coded using the valence coding system (Hoffman & Maier, 1964, 1967). Eight operational measures of task conflict are presented and used to test the main hypothesis. The results indicate that in unequal power groups an assigned majority rule facilitates more task conflict than an assigned unanimous rule or no assigned decision rule. The eight measures of task conflict are shown to be useful but require additional refinement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BEISECKER, T.Communication and conflict in interpersonal negotiations. Paper presented to the Speech Communication Association, New York. 1969.
2.
BOWER, J. L.The role of conflict in economic decision making groups: Some empirical results. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1965, 79, 263-277.
3.
BURGOON, M., HESTON, J. K., & McCROSKEY, J.Small group communication: A functional approach. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974.
4.
FALK, G.Unanimity versus majority rule in problem solving groups: A challenge to the superiority of unanimity. Small Group Behavior, 1981, 12, 379-399.
5.
FALK, G., & FALK, S.The impact of decision rules on the distribution of power in problem solving teams with unequal power. Group and Organization Studies, 1981, 6, 211-223.
6.
FALK, G., & HOFFMAN, L. R.A valence analysis of the impact of decision rules in unequal power groups. In L. R. Hoffman, The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model. New York: Praeger, 1979, 142-153.
7.
FISHER, B. A.Small group decision making: communication and the group process. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
8.
GUETZKOW, H., & GYR, J.An analysis of conflict in decision making groups. Human Relations, 1954, 7, 367-382.
9.
HALL, J., & WATSON, W. H.The effects of a normative intervention on group decision making performance. Human Relations, 1970, 23, 299-317.
10.
HOFFMAN, L. R.Conditions for creative problem solving. The Journal of Psychology, 1961, 52, 429-444.
11.
HOFFMAN, L. R.Group problem solving. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental socialpsychology (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1965.
12.
HOFFMAN, L. R., HARBURG, E., & MAIER, N. R. F.Differences and disagreement as factors in creative group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 64, 206-214.
13.
HOFFMAN, L. R., & MAIER, N. R. F.Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem solving groups: Concept, method, and results. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 264-271.
14.
HOFFMAN, L. R., & MAIER, N. R. F.Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem solving groups: TI. Quality and acceptance as goals of leaders and members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 176-182.
15.
HOLLOMAN, C. R., & HENDRICK, H. W.Adequacy of group decisions as a function of the decision making process. Academy of Management Journal, 1972, 15, 175-184.
16.
LEWIN, K.A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1935.
17.
MAIER, N. R. F.Principles of human relations: Applications to management. New York: Wiley, 1952.
18.
MAIER, N. R. F.Psychology in industry. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1965.
19.
MAIER, N. R. F.Assets and liabilities in group problem solving: The need for an integrative function. Psychological Review, 1967, 74, 239-249.
20.
MAIER, N. R. F., & HOFFMAN, L. R.Quality of first and second solutions in group problem solving process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1960, 44, 278-283.
21.
MAIER, N. R. F., & HOFFMAN, L. R.Acceptance and quality of solutions as related to leader's attitudes toward disagreement in group problem solving. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1965, 1, 373-386.
22.
MAIER, N. R. F., & SOLEM, A. R.The contribution of a discussion leader to the quality of group thinking: The effective use of minority opinions. Human Relations, 1952, 5, 277-288.
23.
ORNE, M. T.On the social psychology of the psychological experiment; with particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 1962, 17, 776-783.
24.
ROSENTHAL, R.Experimenter effects in behavioral research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.
25.
THOMAS, E. J., & FINK, C. F.Models of group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1961, 63, 53-63.
26.
TORRANCE, E. P.Some consequences of power differences on decision making in permanent and temporary three man groups. Research Studies, State College in Washington, 1954, 22, 130-140. Also in A. P. Hare, B. F. Borgatta, & R. F. Bales (Eds.), Small Groups. New York: Knopf, 1955.
27.
VAN DE VEN, A., & DELBECQ, A. L.Nominal versus interacting group processes for committee decision making effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 1971, 14, 203-212.
