Organizational Behaviour Comportement Organisationnel

work-related tasks, known as task conflict, and disagreements of an interpersonal nature, knownas relationship or emotional conflict (Jehn, 1995; 1997). Task and relationship conflict have mostoften been described in terms of their effects on group performance or group effectiveness (e.g.,Jehn & Mannix; 2001; Pelled, Eisenhardt & Xin, 1999). While moderate amounts of task conflictenhance group effectiveness because it increases members’ understanding of the task throughidentification and discussion of various diverse perspectives (Amason & Schweiger, 1994), anyamount of relationship conflict is detrimental to group effectiveness as it takes time and energyaway from technical or task-related issues (Jehn & Mannix, 2001; Pelled, 1996). Members ingroups experiencing relationship conflict tend to become preoccupied with activities such asreducing threat, increasing power, and building cohesion with other members (Jehn, 1997).While these activities appear to be similar to those described as being political (e.g., Pfeffer,1976; 1981), we argue that activities associated with relationship conflict are likely to be similarto non-sanctioned political activities, while those associated with task conflict are similar tosanctioned political activities.Non-sanctioned behaviours are those that are not usually supported by the organizationand are considered to be socially undesirable, while sanctioned political behaviours are typicallysought and encouraged (Mayes & Allen, 1977; Vrendenburg & Maurer, 1984). Zanzi andO’Neill’s (2001) factor analysis of a number of political tactics identified intimidation,manipulation, and blaming or attacking others as non-sanctioned activities, while actions such aspersuasion, image building, networking, and use of expertise were categorized as sanctioned.The interpersonal nature of such non-sanctioned activities is similar to that experienced bymembers of groups with high relationship conflict. For example, group members experiencingrelationship conflict often describe it in terms of friction, personality clashes, or threat betweenmembers (Argyris, 1962; Jehn, 1995; Staw, Sandelands, & Dutton, 1981). In addition, nonsanctionedtactics and relationship conflict have both been found to contribute to dysfunctionaloutcomes (e.g., Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey, & Toth, 1997; Jehn & Mannix, 2001).In contrast, sanctioned tactics and task conflict are thought to have functionalconsequences (Mayes & Allen, 1977; Pelled, Eisenhardt, & Xin, 1999) and are often encouragedin organizational settings (Zanzi & O’Neill, 2001). For example, the use of persuasion bymanagers was found to promote cooperation among subordinates in achieving organizationalgoals (Brown, 1995). In Harrell-Cook, Ferris, and Dulebohn’s (1999) examination of ingratiationand self-promotion behaviours, the stronger association between ingratiation behaviours ofsubordinates and perceived politics by supervisors was explained in terms of the ease/difficulty inascertaining ingratiation versus self-promotion as political, suggesting that supervisors mayactually encourage subordinates to act competent through self-promotion. We argue that bothtypes of conflict are likely to increase perceptions of political activity. However, task conflictwill have a weaker association with perceptions of political activity because such activities tendto be sanctioned in nature, and hence, less likely to be perceived in political terms.Hypothesis 1:Hypothesis 2:Departments with higher levels of intra-departmental task and relationshipconflict will have more politicized climates.Intra-departmental relationship conflict will be more strongly related to politicalclimate level than will intra-departmental task conflict.Etiology of Political ClimatesTwo main perspectives on climate etiology have dominated the literature (Schneider &Reichers, 1983): the structural approach (Payne & Pugh, 1976) which postulates that climatesarise from objective or structural aspects of the organizational setting, and a micro perspective(the selection-attraction-attrition model) which suggests that organizational selection/attritionprocesses result in individuals having similar perceptions of organizational events (Schneider,1987). The inherent tension between person and situation, resulting from treating these two37