Impat of Task Conflict on Contextual and Adaptive Work

Performance. The Mediating Role of Employee Voice Behavior.

INTRODUCTIONS

Conspicuously all human beings interact socially with others, they observe the events occurring

around them; they monitor the environment and assess its positive and negative aspects

according to their understanding. This happens wherever people live and work together and

intermingle with each other, following their observation to environment, they make their

opinions about the things happening around them and feel comfortable and relaxed when given a

chance to express their views about various events. Similarly, employees in work settings

observe their work environment and form opinions about the events occurring there. They want

to get their voice heard at proper forums (immediate supervisors, subordinates, senior official

and top management) about work- related issues ranging from rewards and promotions, salary

increments, transfers, working conditions to performance appraisal etc. under conflict scenarios,

the importance of voice behaviors is multiplied and they want to express their concerns more

strongly. As a behavior, voice is conceptually grounded in Hirschman’s typology of responses of

exit, voice, loyalty and neglect (The EVLN Model) (Hirschman, 1970). The model was

fundamentally developed for customer relations, yet it has a broad applicability and regularly

referred in organizational behavior literature as employees’ possible responses to their work-

related issues.
 Conflict is an awareness of the parties involved of discrepancies, incompatible wishes, or

irreconcilable desires (Boulding, 1963; Jehn & Mannix, 2001). It is ubiquitous across teams with

a high level of task interdependence (Jehn, 1995). Task conflicts are “disagreements among

group members about the content and outcomes of the task being performed” (De Wit et al.,

2012, p. 360). Different viewpoints, opinions and ideas (Jehn, 1995; Jehn et al., 2008; Jehn &

Mannix, 2001) about “task issues such as goals, key decision areas and the appropriate choice of

action prompt such disagreements” (Pelled, Eisenhardt, & Xin, 1999, p. 2). Another notation for

task conflict is “substantive” conflict, which refers to the content of the task as well (Pelled,

1996). Such conflicts are often described as “work conflict”, “work disagreements”, and “task

problems” (Jehn & Bendersky, 2003, p. 200) and are about “people getting irritated at each other

and fight about work things” like interpreting reports (Jehn, 1997, p. 541). Task conflicts

therefore can, in a nutshell, be defined as conflicts due to different attitudes and views regarding

task solving.

The EVLN model as described in the context of employment relationships takes the

following form. Voice in organizations is a constructive behavior intended to bring positive

changes and improve the situation by actively sharing opinions and exchanging ideas with

organizational members (Lepine and Dyne, 2001). Loyalty refers to a passive yet optimistic

waiting for the situation to be improved and remaining committed with the organization

(Rusbult, Farrell, Rogers and Mainous, 1988). Neglect is a negative behavior that some

employees opt as a response by showing up late, remaining absent, being intentionally lazy and

misusing official hours as personal time (Farrell, 1983). Exit is the last option that some

employees exercise by actively searching new job opportunities and/or leaving the organization

(Rusbult et al., 1988). Hence, out of the four possible responses, voice is the most active one,
which if heard and considered is likely to bring positive outcomes to individuals and

organization, which may be in the form of employee-friendly policies, better working conditions,

and fair treatment of employees.

The basic rationale of assessing the influence of voice behaviors upon its outcomes is to

find out ways of improving communication between organizational members so that intended

positive results can be taken and negative or undesired results can be minimized as Pauksztata,

Steglich and Wittek, (2011) identified voice as a two-way communication method of sharing

problems and opportunities with organizational members. It is believed that improved

communication amongst organizational members leads to improved work performance of

employees. Various studies have been conducted to ascertain the link between organizational

communication, and job performance, however there is a need to explore the link of voice

behaviors with employees’ contextual and adaptive job performance. This study has special

emphasis to explore the link between employee voice and their contextual and adaptive job

performance.

We are living in the era of advancement in communication and access to information,

thus a study on employee voice is significant in understanding if there still exist certain

organizations which do not give their employees the due share in terms of sharing ideas for

betterment and what are the negative consequences and costs of doing so. Moreover, this study is

meaningful in many ways. The results will identify the consequences of employee voice

behaviors in organizations; because it is important for them to identify their voice-related

problems and fine tune their current practices to properly channelize employee voice to avoid

any future troubles. Furthermore, the recent study will add to the existing body of employee
voice literature in the context of Pakistan and it will bring to light the most important employee

voice variables in Pakistan-based organizations.

Past research has observed that conflict emerges when team members have developed

opposing values and goals (Cosier & Rose, 1977; Eisenhardt & Schoonhoven, 1990). Recent

studies have further found that conflict may still dominate the team decision making process

even when team members share the same goals because people with different knowledge bases

and experiences may approach the team’s tasks from diverse and even opposing perspectives

(Amason, 1996; Jehn et al., 1999).

Job performance includes but not limited to specific behaviors on the job, which are

exhibited in order to achieve the desired goals, (Campbell, Mchenry and Wise, 1990). Work

behaviors dictating job performance varies from job to job and organization to organization. For

instance, a computer operator’s work behavior will be different from the work behaviors of an

accountant. A major part of job performance is task performance, which links an employee’s

efforts with the performance of the organization which ultimately results in rewards and other

positive reinforcements, (Williams and Karau, 1991). Therefore, task performance is directly

linked with performing the technical or professional aspects of the job for which the incumbent

is hired. Contextual performance is that part of performance which is generally not required for

rewards and benefits, yet it is essential for the social, environmental and psychological well-

being of the organization, (Sonnentag, Volmer and Spychala, 2008). Hence, contextual factors

involve an employee’s courtesy, cooperativeness, making extra efforts and abiding by the

policies of the organization. Lastly there is adaptive performance, which is a relatively newer

dimension of performance and quiet applicable to today’s dynamic work environment. Adaptive

performance refers to an employee’s ability to handle crises, emergencies, uncertainties and

holding adaptive skills is useful for employees in an environment of changing job requirements

and needs to be a part of an organization’s long-term selection criteria.

Various studies have been conducted to ascertain the link between organizational

communication, and job performance, however there is a need to explore the link of engagement

in voice behaviors with employees’ job performance under situations of task conflict. This study

attempts to explore the link between task conflict and contextual and adaptive job performance

with the mediating effect of employee engagement in voice behaviors which is presented in the

form of a research model. The mediating mechanism between task conflict and performance

(contextual and adaptive) will open avenues for understanding the dynamics through which such

a conflict becomes useful in organizational context.

Problem Statement

Although the positive outcomes of task conflicts have been studied and reported in terms of task

performance, yet there is limited work on how task conflict affect other dimensions of

performance which are contextual and adaptive performance, and amongst the most relevant

dimensions in the wake of today’s complex and dynamic work environment. Similar to task

performance; contextual and adaptive performance of employees are important in determining

their overall effectiveness. But these two dimensions of work performance have remained

unexplored in their relation with task conflict. Additionally, there has been limited studies that

link employee voice behaviors with their work performance in general and with contextual and

adaptive work performance in particular. This creates ground for the assumption that task
conflict may lead to employee vice behaviors resulting in the subsequent improvement of their

contextual and adaptive performance.

Therefore, it is logical to state that studying the relationship between task conflict and

employee voice behaviors and its outcomes is a critical step towards aligning managerial

practices with individual voice behaviors and taking its advantage in the form of improved

contextual and adaptive work performance.

Theoretical Underpinnings

The present study is theoretically based on the Exit, Voice, Loyalty, Neglect Model (EVLN

Model, Hirschman 1970), portraying individual reactions to dissatisfaction in relationships. The

exit-voice-loyalty-neglect (EVLN), framework conceptualized by Hirschman (1970) and further

elaborated by Farrell, (1983), Rusbult et al., (1988) is highly considered as a useful framework to

understanding employees' responses towards conflicts. Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect are

theorized as four different responses to dissatisfying employment conditions. The seminal work

of Hirschman (1970) focused on the concerns of how employees responded to declining

economic conditions. Furthermore, this focus got important attention in studies on employment

relationships (e.g. Rusbult et al., 1988), organizational behavior responses (e.g. Farrell, 1983;

Lemire and Rouillar, 2005; Rusbult et al., 1988; Sverke and Hellgren, 2001; Withey and Cooper,

1989; Chaudhry et al., 2009).

Under scenarios of task conflict, employees may respond with higher exit behavior

(referred to as quitting the organization, or actively looking for another job), more voice behavior

(referred to as taking reasonable initiative in a belief that conditions can be improved, offering
open discussions, providing solutions i.e. voice behaviors in our study), decreased loyalty

(referred to as decreasing the involvement in extra role and organizational citizenship behavior

OCB), or more neglect behavior (employees perform half-heartedly, reducing their active

involvement, ignoring their responsibility, lateness, absenteeism). People who are in conflict can

focus their attention on non-work interests (passive and destructive reduction of commitment:

neglect). Moreover, they may try to improve their situation through voice (active and

constructive problem solving). Another possibility is to passively support the organization with

loyalty (passive, but constructive hope of problem solving). Finally, employees may quit their

job (exit which is active, but destructive from the view. therefore, we argue that under task

conflict scenarios (independent variable), employee will be actively involved in voicing

behaviors (mediating variable), of which the positive outcomes are expected in the form of

improved contextual and adaptive performance (dependent variable).

Research Questions

The following research questions are framed for the current study

 Does task conflict predict employees’ contextual performance?

 Does task conflict predict employees’ adaptive performance?

 Do voice behaviors play a mediating role between task conflict and contextual performance?

 Do voice behaviors play a mediating role between task conflict and adaptive performance?

Research Objectives

The study will be conducted with the following objectives:

2. To find out the relationship between task conflict and employees’ adaptive performance

3. To ascertain the mediating role of employee voice behaviors between task conflict and two

types of performance i.e. contextual and adaptive

Significance of the Study

The present study is significant in filling the gap in literature as it takes the positive effects of

task conflict upon two unexplored dimensions of employee performance (contextual and

adaptive), and takes employee voice behaviors as the mediator, which creates a comprehensive

model. Therefore, the study will explain the role of task conflict in predicting employees’

contextual and adaptive performance, voice behaviors being the mediating variable.

Such a study model has not been tested earlier, particularly in Pakistani context. The

present study will, therefore contribute to the existing conflict literature by providing new

insights into how task conflict affects employee voice behaviors and subsequently to its

outcomes in telecommunication organizations of Pakistan. Additionally, the results reported

further are relevant in determining the generalizability of the research model to entire Pakistani

private sector organizations with similar competition level, policies, procedures, culture and

working environment.